We have considered it our duty to record in a permanent form the proceedings of the most important meeting which has been held in Britain, since Sir Robert Peel deliberately renounced that policy of which he was once the plighted champion. Not many months have elapsed since the Free-traders were wont to aver, with undaunted effrontery, that all idea of a return to the principles of Protection to native industry was eradicated from the minds of the British public; that, saving some elderly peers and a few bigoted enthusiasts like ourselves, no sane man would attempt to overturn a system which placed the untaxed foreigner on a level with the home-producer; and that cheapness, superinduced by exorbitant competition, was in reality the greatest blessing which could be vouchsafed to an industrious people. The great measure of the age, originally propounded as an experiment, was eagerly assumed as a fact; and we were told, for the first time in British history, that legislation, however faulty it might prove, was to be regarded as a thing irrevocable.

It was, however, rather remarkable that, whilst making these broad assertions, the Free-traders manifested a distinct uneasiness as to the working of their favourite scheme. If the measures which they advocated and carried were indeed final, there was surely no need for the bluster which was repeated, week after week, and day after day, from platform and from hustings, in Parliament and out of it, in pamphlet, broad-sheet, and review. If no considerable party cared about Protection, and still less meditated a vigorous effort for its revival, why should Mr Cobden and his brother demagogues have uselessly committed themselves by threatening, in so many words, to shake society to its centre, and overturn the constitution of the realm? Men never resort to threats, when they deem themselves positively secure. Such language was, to say the least of it, injudicious; since it was calculated to create an impression, especially among the waverers, that the temple of Free Trade, (which, by the way, is to be roofed in next year,) might after all have its foundation on a quicksand, instead of being firmly established on the solid stratum of the rock.

No charge can be made against the country party, that they have precipitately commenced their movement. On the contrary, we believe it would be impossible to find an instance of a vast body of men betrayed by their appointed leader; aggrieved by a course of legislation which they could not prevent, since a direct appeal to the suffrages of the nation was denied; injured in their property; and taunted for their apathy even by their opponents—yet submitting so long and so patiently to the operation of a cruel law which day by day was forcing them onwards to the brink of ruin. The practical working of the withdrawal of agricultural protection dates from February 1849, when that event was inaugurated by a Manchester ovation. In April the price of wheat had fallen to about 44s.—in December it was below 40s.; and then, and not till then, was the spirit of the people fairly and thoroughly aroused. We need not here advert to the foolish and deplorable trash put forward by the political economists in defence of a system of cheapness, caused by an unnatural depreciation of the value of British produce. That such a depreciation could take place, without lowering in a corresponding degree the rates of labour all over the country, and curtailing the demand for employment in proportion to the diminished means of the consumers, was obviously impossible. Nor could the wit of man devise any answer to the proposition at once so clear and so momentous, that the burden of taxation, already felt to be severe, was enormously aggravated and increased by the measures which virtually established a new standard of value for produce, and which violently acted upon the incomes of almost every ratepayer in the kingdom. But it is well worth noting that the leading advocates of Free Trade, previous to the conversion of Sir Robert Peel, cautiously abstained from arguing their case on the ground of permanent cheapness. We have on this point the valuable testimony of Mr Cobden, who repeatedly declared his conviction that the farmers, and even the landowners, would derive a large and direct advantage from the repeal of the corn laws. We have the treatises of Mr Wilson, Secretary of the Board of Control, pathetically pointing out the positive detriment to the country which must ensue from a long continuance of low prices of grain. And finally, we have Sir Robert Peel's distinct admission that 56s. per quarter is the average price for which wheat can be raised with a profit in Great Britain. It was not until all rational hope of a rise was extinguished—until the amount of importations poured into this country demonstrated the fallacy of all the calculations which had been made as to the amount of surplus supply available from the Continent and from America—that any section of the Free-traders ventured to proclaim the doctrine that cheapness, ranging below the level of the cost of home production, was a positive advantage to the nation. It is true that this monstrous fallacy is now maintained by only a few of the more unscrupulous and desperate of the party; and that the Ministry have as yet abstained from committing themselves to so fatal a dogma. They would have us rather cling to the hope that present prices are only temporary, though they cannot assign a single plausible reason to account for the continued depression. They talk, in vague general terms,—the surest symptoms of their actual incapacity and helplessness—of "transition states of suffering," of "partial derangement inseparable from the formation of a new system of commercial policy," and much more such pompous and unmeaning jargon; whilst, at the same time, they refuse to commit themselves to any decided line of action, if it should actually be found that they were wrong in their calculations, and that prices so low as to be absolutely ruinous are not temporary in their operation, but must hereafter prevail as the rule. How often have we heard, on the part of their organs, even within the last two months, joyous assertions that the markets were again rising, and foreign supplies diminishing! Within this last fortnight, the Times, emboldened by the continuance of cold easterly winds, and the backward state of the vegetation, prophesied, with more than its usual confidence, a rapid rise and a consequent diminution of cheapness. On the 13th of May, our prospects were thus described:—"Happily just now corn is rising, and we are quite as likely to see wheat at 60s. as 30s. in the course of the year." On the 14th, the journalist again returned to the charge—"Just now the market is rising all over the world, and it seems likely enough that the farmer will soon have, in the natural course of things, what Mr G. Berkeley wants to obtain by a return to Protection.... The same agreeable tidings pour in from all parts of the kingdom, and indeed from all parts of the world." Alas for human prescience! On the 21st, the note was changed, and the bulletin from Corn-Exchange announced that "the trade was dull, and the prices gave way 1s. to 2s. per quarter before any progress could be made in sales." The aggregate average of wheat for the six weeks ending May 11th, was 37s. 1d.—a rate at which no one, not even the most sanguine dabbler in agricultural improvement, has ventured to aver that corn can be raised, under present burdens, without occasioning an enormous loss to the grower.

We do not complain of these calculations or prophecies, however fallacious they may be; but we do complain, very seriously, that Ministers, their organs and their underlings, are halting between two opinions. If cheapness is their watchword and principle, then they have no right to plume themselves upon any rise in the value of produce. We can understand the thorough-paced Free-trader who tells us broadly, that the cheaper food can be bought, no matter whence it comes, so much the better for the community. That is, at all events, plain sailing. But we say deliberately, that a more pitiable spectacle of mental imbecility cannot be imagined than that which is now presented by the Cabinet, who, with cheapness in their mouths, are eagerly catching at the faintest shadow of a rise in prices; and who, did such a rise take place, would be the first to congratulate the country on the improved condition of its prospects! Mr Wilson, who usually communicates to the Premier, in the House of Commons, the invaluable results of his experience, has been blundering on for months in the preposterous hope of getting rid of facts by trumpery and fallacious statistics; and has at last landed himself in such a quagmire of contradictions, that his best friends are compelled to despair of his ultimate extrication. Yet this gentleman is one of those authorities whom we are told to regard with reverence; and whom we do regard with just as much reverence as we would bestow upon a broker's clerk who had set up for himself in business as a dealer in the scrip of exploded and abandoned lines.

It was not until sinking markets, and continued foreign importations, showed as clearly as facts could do that the depression of value was permanent, and not temporary—until the farmers of England found that they were absolute losers in their trade, and that their stock had become unprofitable—until wages were beginning to fall in many important districts, and the means of employment for thousands were gradually taken away—not until all this was seen, and felt, and known, that the suffering interests awoke from their presumed lethargy, and commenced that system of active agitation which, in an incredibly short period of time, has become universal over the face of the country. We shall not particularise the language which was used by men of the opposite party during the first period of the movement. All that insolence, bluster, and menace could do, was attempted by the former leaders of the League, to intimidate those who knew that they were performing their duty to their country and themselves, by making head against the most monstrous system of tyranny which ever yet was devised for the oppression of a free and prosperous people. Mr Cobden had the consummate folly—we need not call it wickedness—to threaten that, if one iota of the free-trade policy were reversed, he would raise up such a storm as would shake England to its centre and thoroughly revolutionise society. And, to the eternal disgrace of the Government be it spoken—the name of the demagogue who had dared to hold such language was allowed by the first Minister of the Crown to stand on a list of public commissioners! Then the landowners were emphatically warned to beware of originating a struggle, from which they might chance to emerge with something worse than a mere depreciation of their property. The warning, though doubtless well meant, was almost wholly unnecessary. The marked and characteristic feature of the new agitation is, that the landlords, as a body, have kept themselves so far aloof from it that their apathy has more than once been made a topic for the severest censure. It was among the tenant-farmers and yeomen of England—we say it to their praise and glory—that this mighty movement began. They saw how they had been deceived and betrayed by those to whom they had intrusted their cause; and the gallant Saxon spirit, never so greatly shown as when roused by a sense of oppression, was exerted to vindicate and champion the rights of their insulted order. The men of almost every county of England spoke out manfully in their turn. By a wise and timely system of organisation, skilfully planned and energetically carried into effect, their isolated efforts were directed into one grand channel of action. The National Association for the Protection of Industry and Capital, under the presidency of that high-minded and patriotic nobleman, the Duke of Richmond, and the energetic direction of Mr George Frederick Young, whose services to the cause can never be adequately acknowledged, afforded a centre and rallying point to the operations of the English Protectionists; and county after county, division after division, town after town, came forward to give new impulse and confidence to the movement. It might have been expected that a feeling so general, so undeniably powerful in itself, might have been treated with fair respect by the experimental party and their organs. The fact was otherwise. The farmers were branded with falsehood, with fraud, with getting up fictitious cases of distress, with ignorance in not understanding their own peculiar business. Last year they had been invited to join the enemy, and to embark in a crusade the object of which was not explicitly set forth; but enough was disclosed to indicate that it boded no good to the maintenance either of the constitution or the public credit, or the interests of society as these have hitherto been acknowledged. They were told to let the landlords fight their own battle, and they, the farmers, would be cared for. Those who held such language had forgotten that, of all known sins, hypocrisy is the one most odious to the English mind. True, if familiarity with hypocrisy could have blunted that finer moral sense, it might have been assumed that the many public examples to be gathered from the history of the last few years, might have overcome that extreme repugnance to deceit which is part of the national character. If so, the Free-traders little understood the temper of the men with whom they had to deal. The proposal of an amalgamation with those who had never scrupled to use the most tortuous and questionable means for the attainment of their own object, was rejected with consummate scorn; and the disappointed agitators revenged themselves by discharging against the agriculturists whole volleys of unmeaning invective.

As if to add to real injury as much insult as the most perverted ingenuity could devise, the yeomen and farmers were publicly and repeatedly told, that the suffering of which they complained was their own deliberate choice. There was plenty of excellent land for tillage elsewhere than in Britain—acres might be had at a cheap rate either in America or in Poland—why not emigrate to those countries, and assist in augmenting that stream of importation which would only swamp them at home? Such was the advice tendered, and tendered seriously, in more than one of the leading journals of the day; and we hardly know whether to reprobate it most on account of its folly or its wickedness. If it was meant as a jest, all we shall say is, that a sorrier or more indecent one was never hatched in a shallow brain. We have not yet, thank God! arrived at such a pass that love of country and of kindred, and those ties which ought to be dearest to the human heart, are regarded by Englishmen as no better than idle and unmeaning terms—we are not yet prepared to abandon our nationality, and receive the fraternal hug from the arms of cosmopolitan democracy. That such insults as these have been felt bitterly, we know; and it is small wonder. Those who coined them knew little of the workings of human nature, if they hoped by such wretched means to deter any one from the path of duty. They have simply succeeded in arousing a feeling which had far better have been allowed to slumber—a conviction on the part of those whom they deride, that the injury which the Free-trading party has inflicted on the community at large arose less from an error in judgment than from a wilful obduracy of heart.

We have spoken thus strongly, because we would fain see less bitterness connected with a contest which is clearly inevitable, and which ought to be one of principle. Men who are in the deepest earnest, and thoroughly impressed with the truth and magnitude of their cause, are not apt to make allowance for the play of ill-regulated sarcasm, or the efforts of a clumsy humour. Still less will they brook such insolent defiance as lately emanated from Mr Cobden at Leeds. To the latter individual we presume to offer no advice. He stands chargeable with having done his utmost to excite a war of classes, and if he fails in doing so, it will not be for want of determination of purpose. But we do say to others, and we say it most seriously, that it is not safe, in the present posture of affairs, to heap insult upon a body of men, comprehending in their numbers the very flower of England's population—a body at all times averse to combination, and to those agitating arts which of late years have been so successfully practised in the towns—a body which never is roused except on occasion of the utmost moment; but which, when, once roused, will never rest till it has triumphantly achieved its purpose.

The movement, which has been so rapid in the south, has also extended to Scotland. A Central Protective Association has been instituted in Edinburgh, comprising amongst its members many of the highest rank and greatest intelligence in the country. Local societies have been formed in East Lothian, Morayshire, Banffshire, Ross-shire, Aberdeen, Roxburghshire, and elsewhere; and, from the communications received from every quarter, we have no doubt that, in a very short while, similar Protection Associations will be organised in every county of Scotland from Berwick to Caithness. From the present Parliament it is now quite plain that nothing can be expected. We never were so unreasonable as to expect that, however strong might be the convictions of individual members—however public opinion and the lessons of experience might shake the faith of many in the wisdom of our late commercial policy—this Parliament would undo the work which was sanctioned by its predecessor. Had the Free-trade question been before the public at the last general election, we might have entertained an opposite opinion. But it was not so. Sir Robert Peel had no intention that the country should have a voice in the matter. He seized the moment when, by an extraordinary combination of circumstances, a majority was at his command, to play into the hands of the enemy, and to complete, by the surrender of the Corn Laws, the furtive scheme of which his tariffs were the mere commencement. That once carried, the nation was unwilling to disturb, by premature opposition or attempt at a reversal, an experiment in behalf of which such weighty testimony had been given. No impediment was thrown in the way—no unnecessary obstacle interposed. The Whig Ministry, who, in their new character of Free-traders, had undertaken the superintendence of affairs, were allowed by the constituencies of the Empire to have more than a working majority; so that, at all events, whatever might be the issue of the scheme, they could not pretend that a fair trial was denied to it. The question now arises, whether the trial has been of sufficiently long endurance. On that point there is no doubt in the minds of the agriculturists, of those connected with the Colonies, of the shipowners, of a large proportion of the merchants, and of a considerable body of the tradesmen. The effect of the experiment has been felt; and that, too, more severely and intensely than perhaps the most determined opponent of the Free-trade policy had anticipated. The movement has been begun, as is most natural, among those who are first in the order of suffering; and who now see, very clearly, that longer endurance and quiescence is tantamount to absolute ruin. Each day swells their ranks by a fresh accession of adherents, whilst the opposite party, defeated in argument, and unable to adduce a single proof of the advantages which they formerly prophesied, are compelled to have recourse to the Janus-like attitude which we have already attempted to sketch, and, when hard pressed, to repeat their sullen refusal of originating a change—for no better reason than that they are ashamed to acknowledge the extent of their error.

From the present Parliament, then, we expect little. Whatever impression may be made upon it by the present unmistakeable ferment abroad, we cannot indulge in a rational hope that it will depart from its original character. Our business is to prepare for a change by that pacific but most necessary agitation, which, if properly conducted, must compel the most obstinate Minister, for his own sake, and in fulfilment of his sworn duty to his Sovereign, to advise that opportunity of an appeal to the sense of the country which is now so generally demanded, and which can scarce be constitutionally refused.

In the following pages our readers will find a correct report of the proceedings of the delegates who were deputed from almost every part of the United Kingdom to assemble in London in the earlier part of May, and to hold a conference on the present alarming prospects of the industrial condition of the nation. We shall not offer any comment on the speeches delivered at the great public meeting at the Crown and Anchor on the 7th ult.—a meeting which has stricken with confusion and dismay those who affected to deny the existence of general distress throughout the kingdom—further than to notice the odious and unfounded charge of disloyalty and disaffection which has been preferred against some of the speakers. That the leading journals opposed to Protection should have made the most of casual expressions uttered by honest men, unused to platform exhibitions, whilst referring to circumstances of almost unparalleled provocation, appears to us nowise wonderful. The journalist, writing at short notice, has a certain conventional license of interpretation; and unless he is unusually stringent or unfair, few people are inclined to quarrel with the pungency of a leading article. But we confess that we were not prepared for the sudden bursts of loyalty which emanated from the Whigs. With the memory of the T. Y. correspondence still vividly impressed upon our minds, we were surprised by the improved delicacy and refinement of tone exhibited by certain parties who are popularly supposed to know something of those famous letters. For their satisfaction, we are glad to inform them that their apprehensions are as groundless as their insinuations are hypocritical. It never has been, and it never will be, a charge against the yeomanry and tenantry of Great Britain that they are cold in their loyalty, or deficient in their duty and devotion to their Sovereign. But when they are taunted and defied by the approvers of republican institutions—when they are told broadly, from the manufacturing districts, that whatever may be the decision of another Parliament, whatever may be the verdict of the electoral body throughout the kingdom—that decision and that verdict shall avail nothing to reinstate them in their former position, but shall be nullified and overwhelmed by revolutionary risings and appeals to physical force—it is not only most natural, but most proper, that they should declare their resolute determination to vindicate their rights, if needful, by all the means which Providence has placed in their power, and to rescue their country from the lawless usurpation and tyranny of those who have been audacious enough to disclose the true nature and character of their schemes. It is perhaps needless to say any more upon this subject; indeed, after the remarks which fell from Lord John Russell at his interview with the delegates, it would be absurd to proceed further in the refutation of a charge which can only recoil with disgrace and ridicule on those who ventured to prefer it. Nor do we think it any matter of regret that the persons who have so often taunted the agricultural interest with their supineness, and drawn unfavourable conclusions as to their zeal from the singular extent of their patience, should at length be made aware that it may be dangerous to trifle with men who are driven by indefensible legislation to the brink of misery and ruin.

The annexed report of the meeting at the Crown and Anchor, revised by the several speakers, will show the unanimity which prevailed, the ability with which the interests of the country party were advocated, and the enthusiasm with which the spirited addresses were received. It was indeed an assembly which will be long remembered after the excitement and emergency which created it have passed away. We need not dwell upon details which are still fresh in the public mind: we shall best perform our duty by making one or two commentaries upon the replies which were made to the addresses of the delegates who were deputed to wait upon the Premier and on Lord Stanley.

The address to Lord John Russell is a document deserving of the most serious attention. It is a broad protest and warning, on the part of the loyal and constitutional people of the realm, against obstinate perseverance in a course of policy which has already proved disastrous to many of the most important interests. After setting forth in clear and temperate language the nature of the measures complained of, it concludes with as solemn a remonstrance and charge of responsibility as ever yet was addressed to a Minister of Great Britain. Lord John Russell accepts the responsibility, which, indeed, he cannot deny; but, without ignoring the justice of the complaint, he refuses the required relief. Perhaps no other answer was expected by the most sanguine of those who formed the deputation, nor should we have done more than simply note the general tenor of the refusal, had not Lord John Russell volunteered a statement which, we humbly think, is by no means calculated to augment his reputation as a minister, and which discloses certain views which we maintain to be at utter variance with the genius and spirit of the constitution. The passage to which we refer is as follows:—"I am sorry to say that I think the conduct of the agricultural, the colonial, and the other interests, was not prudent in declaring that there should be no change in 1841. Still, that was their decision, and in 1846 a much greater change was effected in those laws. In 1847, a general election took place, by which the electors had to decide upon the conduct of those who had taken part in the adoption of these changes; and the result was the election of the present Parliament, which has decided upon continuing the policy which the House of Commons had laid down in 1846. I own I do think it was very unwise, if I may be allowed to say so, in 1841, not to have sought some compromise; but I think it would be far more unwise now to seek to restore a system of protective duties." Here we have the acknowledgment, quite unreservedly made, that expediency and not justice is the principle recognised by Her Majesty's Government. What Lord John Russell said resolves itself clearly into this: "If you, who represent the agricultural, colonial, and other interests, had thought fit to make a bargain with us in 1841, we, in return for your support, would have insured you a certain amount of protection. I think you were fools not to have done so; but, as you did not, you must even take the consequences." We should like very much to know upon what principle of ethics this singular declaration can be defended. To us it appears at utter variance with honesty, fair dealing, and honour. If, as the Free-traders say, the continuance of protection was a manifest wrong to the industrious classes of the community, what right could Lord John Russell have had to effect any manner of compromise? From every Government, whatever be its constitution, we are entitled to expect clear and uninfluenced justice. We know of no rule acknowledged in heaven or on earth, which, by the most forced construction, can justify Ministers in sacrificing the general interests of the community for the advantage of one particular class, or in making compromises between public right and private monopoly and gain. For ourselves, and those who think with us, we declare emphatically that we never would be parties to any such degrading compromise; that we should feel ourselves dishonoured if we were advocating merely the interests of a class; and that it is because we know that we have justice on our side that we are resolute in our present appeal. To talk now of former lapsed opportunities of compromise, is to use the language of a freebooter. It reminds us forcibly of an incident in the life of the famous outlaw Rob Roy Macgregor, who, when challenged for having driven away a herd of cattle belonging to his neighbour, very coolly replied—"And what for, then, did he not pay me black-mail?" The cases are perfectly similar. In 1841 no black-mail was tendered: in 1850, after the depredation has been made, we are taunted with not having purchased the favour and the protection of the Whigs!

What right, moreover, we may ask, has Lord John Russell to separate the interests of classes, and to talk of the agriculturists and those connected with the colonies as having taken a distinct and responsible part in the deliberations of 1841? According to the constitutional view, Parliament is the sole tribunal for the settlement of national questions. It is rather too much at the present day to insinuate such a taunt, and to tell the ruined farmer that he has only himself to blame, when, in all human probability, the expected negotiator on the other side, who ought to have made terms with the Whigs, was no less notable a person than Sir Robert Peel! It is difficult to imagine a more detestable and dangerous state of affairs, or one more hurtful to the general morality of the country, than must ensue if these indicated views of the Premier were to pass into general acceptance; and if it were to be understood that individuals, and corporations, and interests, might, on special occasions, effect compromises with the Government, at variance with public justice, with equity, and with honour. We all know what sort of "compromises" were made by Sir Robert Walpole in the course of last century; and evil indeed will be the day when the example so set shall be acted on by a British minister, with this difference merely, that large and avowed "compromises" are substituted for private purchase.

Very different, indeed, was the reception which the delegates received from Lord Stanley. At this peculiar crisis, before the many hundreds of gentlemen who had assembled in the metropolis from all parts of the United Kingdom separated, each to report progress to those of his own county or district, it was determined that a select number of them should wait upon the man to whom the eyes of all were turned as their chosen leader—not only to testify their deep respect for his character and principles, but respectfully to ask advice as to the course which they ought in future to pursue. The universal feeling of the delegates—their confidence in Lord Stanley—their prospects, and the spirit which animated them, were admirably expressed by Mr Layton, who was intrusted with the duty of presenting the address; and the speech of Lord Stanley, which that address elicited, can never pass from the memory of those who were privileged to hear it.

Clearly, rapidly, and with a master hand, Lord Stanley described the position of parties in both Houses of Parliament, not vindicating—for vindication was unnecessary—but guarding himself and those who acted with him against any charge of apathy or indifference in the cause that lay most warmly at their hearts. He explained for the satisfaction of those who, in their impatience, would have precipitated measures, why it was that the leaders of the Protection party had abstained from originating that direct discussion which their opponents, confident in the possession of a majority, were so palpably eager to provoke. Admitting to the full, and deploring the magnitude and prevalence of the suffering which Free Trade has brought upon the country, he did not disguise his belief that a yet further period of probation must be endured, ere the full conviction of the fallacy of those schemes which have passed into law came home to the understanding of the nation. The advice, so cordially asked, was frankly and freely given. "You ask me for advice," said the noble lord—and we cannot forbear again quoting his memorable words, "I say, go on, and God prosper you. Do not tire, do not hesitate, do not falter in your course. Maintain the language of strict loyalty to the crown; and, with a spirit of unswerving obedience to the laws, combine in a determined resolution by all constitutional means to obtain your rights, and to enforce upon those who now misrepresent you the duty of really representing your sentiments, and supporting you in Parliament.... If you ask my advice, I say persevere in the course you have adopted. Agitate the country from one end to the other. Continue to call meetings in every direction. Do not fear, do not flinch from discussion. By all means accept the offer of holding a meeting in that magnificent building at Liverpool; and in our greatest commercial towns show that there is a feeling in regard to the result of our so-called Free Trade widely different from that which was anticipated by the Free-traders, and from that which did prevail only a few years ago. Your efforts may not be so soon crowned with success as you hope; but depend upon it, let us stand hand to hand firmly together; let the landlord, the tenant, and the labourer—ay, and the country shopkeeper—ay, before long, the manufacturer himself, be called on to show and to prove what the effects of this experiment are—and, as sure as we stand together, temperately but firmly determined to assert our rights, so certainly—at the expense, it may be, of intense suffering, and perhaps of ruin to many—of ruin which, God knows, if I could avert, I would omit no effort for that purpose—but ultimately, certainly, and securely we shall attain our object, and recede from that insane policy which has been pursued during the last few years."

We shall not attempt to describe the effect which that address produced upon those who were present—suffice it to say, that every individual there esteemed it a privilege to be allowed to labour in the same cause with the true-hearted, patriotic, and eloquent statesman who had that day so frankly ratified their unanimous choice of a leader, and in whose honour, integrity, and perseverance they reposed the fullest confidence that can be yielded by man to man. Of this our readers may be well assured, that the movement so auspiciously begun will not be allowed to flag; and that it will not be abandoned until the full measure of justice is conceded to all classes throughout the British empire who have been made the victims of a rash experiment, and of one-sided and unjustifiable legislation.

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF INDUSTRY AND CAPITAL.

A General Meeting was convened by the above body at the Crown and Anchor on Tuesday, 7th May, at one o'clock. The great hall was crowded from one extremity to the other by delegates and others from various parts of the kingdom. Nearly two thousand gentlemen were present during the proceedings, whilst many more were compelled to retire without having obtained admittance for want of standing room. On the platform were—the Duke of Richmond, K.G., in the Chair; Major William Beresford, M.P.; Mr Richard Blakemore, M.P.; Captain Boteler, R.E.; Mr T. W. Bramston, M.P.; Mr R. Bremridge, M.P.; Sir Brook W. Bridges, Bart.; Mr L. W. Buck, M.P.; Sir Charles M. Burrell, Bart., M.P.; Viscount Combermere, G.C.B.; Major Chetwynd, M.P.; Colonel Chatterton, M.P.; Mr E. Cayley, jun.; Mr E. S. Chandos Pole; Mr R.A. Christopher, M.P.; the Marquis of Downshire; Baron Dimsdale; Mr J. W. Dod, M.P.; Mr E. Fellowes, M.P.; Mr Floyer, M.P.; Lord Feversham; Mr H. Frewen, M.P.; the Earl of Glengall; Mr A. L. Goddard, M.P.; Mr Howell Gwyn, M.P.; Sir Alexander Hood, M.P.; Mr William King; Sir C. Knightley, Bart., M.P.; Sir Ralph Lopez, Bart., M.P.; Mr W. Long, M.P.; the Earl of Malmesbury; Mr W. F. Mackenzie, M.P.; Lord John Manners, M.P.; Mr J. Neeld, M.P.; Mr Newdegate, M.P.; Mr C. W. Packe, M.P.; Mr Melville Portal, M.P.; Lord Rollo; Earl Stanhope; Viscount Strangford, G.C.B.; Sir Michael Shaw Stewart; Lord Sondes; Colonel Sibthorpe, M.P.; Mr A. Stewart; Earl Talbot; the Hon. and Rev. C. Talbot; Alderman Thompson, M.P.; Sir John Trollope, Bart., M.P.; Sir John T. Tyrell, Bart., M.P.; Captain R. H. R. Howard Vyse, M.P.; Mr H. S. Waddington; the Rev. Edward Young; Mr P. Foskett; Mr G. F. Young; Professor Aytoun, Edinburgh; Mr J. Butt, Q.C.; Professor David Low; Lieutenant-Colonel Blois; Rev. W. M. S. Marriott; Sir James Ramsay, Bart.; Mr W. Caldecott; Captain E. Morgan; Mr Richard Oastler; Rev. A. Duncombe Shafto; Colonel Warren; Mr C. Byron; Rev. H. Franklin; Mr George Edward Frere; Captain Pearson; Sir John Hall, Bart., of Dunglass; Sir Thomas G. Hesketh, Bart.; Mr C. G. White, Limehouse; Rev. R. Exton; Rev. V. G. Yonge; Rev. C. H. Mainwaring; Major Rose; Sir James Drummond, Bart.; Mr Henry Burgess; Mr Samuel Kydd; Mr Delaforce, secretary of trades' delegates; Mr John Blackwood, Edinburgh; Mr H. Higgins, &c., &c.

The following is a correct list of the delegates from the different societies:—

BEDFORDSHIRE.

Bedfordshire.—Messrs Joseph Pain, John Rogers, William Biggs, Benjamin Prole, Thomas Gell, T. James.

BERKSHIRE.

Berkshire.—Messrs E. Tull, R. Warman, George Shackel, J. J. Allnatt, J. Brown, Job Lousley, William Aldworth, W. Sharp.

Newbury District.—Messrs John Brown, Job Lousley.

BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.

Buckingham.—Messrs Philip Box and Henry Smith.

Amersham District.—Messrs Philip Goddard and Robert Ranshaw.

Bucks Association for the Relief of Real Property.—Messrs Edward Stone and Edwin W. Cox.

CAMBRIDGESHIRE.

Cambridgeshire.—Messrs Alexander Cotton, Edward Hicks, Thomas St Quintin, Samuel Webb, John Ellis, W. Bennett, John King, Edward Ball, Samuel Jonas, James Witt, King, John Oslar, Wilson, Holben, Peter Grain, James Leonard, Samuel Witt, James Ivatt.

Isle of Ely.—Messrs Joseph Little, W. Layton, John Vipan, (High Sheriff,) J. Fryer, Henry Martin, Thomas Saberton, Henry Rayner, J. Cropley, W. Martin, W. Saberton, T. W. Granger, W. Harlock, John Cutlack, H. Martin, Thomas Vipan, John Reid, W. Luddington, W. E. Reid, John Swift, John Hall, Henry Martin, jun., George Cook, William Vipan.

Newmarket.—Messrs R. D. Fyson (chairman,) P. Smith (vice chairman,) J. Dobede, W. Layton, G. F. Robins, John Fyson, William Fyson, Edward Staples, Waller Miles King, George Dennis, John Lyles King, R. F. Seaber, William Staples, William Westrope, Thomas Gardner, Robert Fyson, Ambrose Gardner.

DERBYSHIRE, SOUTH.

South Derbyshire.—E. S. Chandos Pole Esq., Mr Malins.

DEVONSHIRE, SOUTH.

South Devon Branch.—J. Elliott, Esq.

Devon and Exter Branch.—Sir J. Y. Buller, Bart., M.P., L. W. Buck, M.P., R. Bremridge, Esq., M.P., Lawrence Palk, Esq., George Turner, Esq., R. Brent, Esq., M.D., secretary, Sir J. Duckworth. Bart., M.P., Edward Trood, Esq.

DORSETSHIRE.

Dorchester.—J. Floyer, Esq., M.P., W. Symonds, Esq.

ESSEX.

Essex Protection Society.—Messrs John Ambrose, S. Baker, Jas. Barker, John Barnard, T. Bridge, Geo. Carter, John Clayden, J. G. Fum, John Francis, Jos. Glascock, Jas. Grove, W. Fisher Hobbs, Jos. Lawrence, S. Reeve, T. K. Thedam, W. Yall, S. Willis, and H. T. Biddell (the secretary.)

Romford District.—Messrs Christopher Thomas Tower, William Bowyer Smyth, Robert Field, John S. Thompson, Major Crosse, J. Gilmore, G. Mashiter, E. Vipan Ind, W. Haslehurst, John Bearblock, John Coseker, James Paulin, Hon. and Rev. H. W. Bertie, Rev. T. L. Fanshawe, Rev. D. G. Stacey, Rev. George Fielding, Thomas Mashiter, jun., W. H. Clifton, Thomas Lee, Robert Pemberton, J. Wallen, James Biggs, John P. Peacock, Henry Moss, T. W. Brittain, James Laming Padnall, George Hooper Theydon, Richard Bunter, Henry Joseph Hance, Thomas Champness, Charles Mollett, Richard Webb, James Hill, George Porter, John Bearblock (Hall Farm,) John Francis, S. B. Gooch, Frederick Francis, Henry Joslin, Wm. Baker, Wm. Blewitt, Thomas Surridge, Rowland Cowper, Collinson Hall, S. R. G. Francis, Daniel Haws, Wm. Freeman, W. Sworder, Charles Pratt, Daniel Hicks.

Grays District.—Messrs Richard Meeson, J. Curtis, T. Sturgeon, Thos. Skinner, Chas. Asplin, Chas. Squier, W. L. Bell, W. C. Cook, J. Sawell, Richard Knight, W. Willis, W. Stevens, H. Sackett, R. Bright, J. Nokes, R. Cliff, C. Sturgeon, R. Ingram, D. Jackson,—Uwins, H. Long, S. Newcome, A. Causton,—Woodthrope, Rev. W. Goodchild, Rev. C. Day, Rev. H. S. Hele, Rev. J. Boulby, Rev. J. Tucker.

Billericay.—Messrs Isaac Crush, J. Brewitt, G. Shaw.

GLAMORGANSHIRE.

Glamorgan.—Rev. Robert Knight, Captain Boteler, Dr Carne; Messrs A. Murray, E. David, William Llewellyn, and R. Franklen.

GLOUCESTERSHIRE, EAST.

Cirencester and Gloucestershire.—Messrs P. Matthews, Edmund Ruck, David Bowly.

HAMPSHIRE, NORTH.

Alton District.—Messrs H. Holding, Edward Knight, H. J. Mulcock, W. Garnett, J. Eggan.

Basingstoke.—Mr George Harriott.

HAMPSHIRE, SOUTH.

Botley and South Hants.—Messrs Edward Twynam, Josh. Blundell, Caleb Gater, W. C. Spooner.

HEREFORDSHIRE.

Herefordshire.—Mr Henry Higgins.

Ledbury District.—Rev. Edward Higgins, Messrs Reynolds Petton, Thomas France.

Ross District.—Mr H. Chillingworth.

HUNTINGDONSHIRE.

Huntingdonshire.—Rev. James Linton, Messrs John Mann, Hammond, Ibbot Mason, Robert T. Moseley, Geo. Brighty, Peter Purvis, John Warsop.

KENT, EAST.

East Kent.—Sir B. W. Bridges, Bart., Messrs D. H. Carttar, Edward Hughes, John Abbot, Edward C. Hughes, Rev. Bradley Dyne, Musgrave Hilton, Charles Neame.

KENT, WEST.

Cranbrook.—Rev. W. M. S. Marriott, Messrs J. E. King, R. Tooth, Geo. Hinds, J. E. Wilson.

Gravesend.—W. M. Smith, Esq., late high sheriff, Messrs W. F. Dobson, T. Collyer, Pinching, W. E. Russell, R. C. Arnold, J. Armstrong, W. Brown, W. Hubble, T. Mace.

Rochester.—Messrs W. Mauclark, W. Miles, C. Lake.

Maidstone.—Messrs T. Abbott, F. B. Eloy, G. Powell.

Edenbridge.—Messrs W. Searle, sen., J. Holmden, Geo. Arnold.

Sevenoaks.—Messrs J. Selby, G. Turner, E. Crook.

Bromley.—Messrs Hammond, Moysar, and Edgerton.

Dartford.—Messrs W. Allen, J. Solomon, and Slaughter.

Tonbridge.—Rev. G. Woodgate, and others.

Wrotham.—Messrs Leary, Thomas Spencer, and Charlton.

LANCASHIRE, SOUTH.

Liverpool.—Messrs Richard C. Naylor, II., Clever Chapman, Charles Turner, Lawrence Peel, Thomas Bold.

LEICESTERSHIRE, NORTH.

Leicestershire.—Messrs Perkins, G. Kilby.

Waltham.—Messrs John Clark, F. Vincent.

LEICESTERSHIRE SOUTH.

Market Harborough.—Messrs Edward Fisher, jun., Josh. Perkins.

Hinckley.—Messrs Matthew Oldacres, John Champion, Charles D. Breton, Thomas Swinnerton, John Brown, Richard Warner, John P. Cooke, James H. Ward.

LINCOLNSHIRE, NORTH.

Lincoln and Lindsey.—Colonel Sibthorp, M.P., R. A. Christopher, Esq., M.P., Mr T. Greetham, Mr J. G. Stevenson.

Grimsby.—Mr F. Iles.

Caistor.—Mr Wm. Torr.

Alford.—Mr W. Loft.

LINCOLNSHIRE, SOUTH.

Long Sutton and Holbeach.—Messrs Wm. Skelton, Spencer Skelton, George Prest.

Sleaford.—Messrs Tinley and Nickolls.

LINCOLNSHIRE, EAST.

East Lincolnshire.—Messrs Fricker, Joseph Rinder, jun.

NORFOLK, EAST.

North Walsham.—John Warnes, Esq.

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE.

Northamptonshire.—Messrs Gray, Rogers, and J. Scriven.

NORTHUMBERLAND.

Northumberland.—Sir Matthew White Ridley, Bart., Messrs Robert David, John Ayersby, John Robson, Walter Johnson, Thomas Smith, H. Wilkin.

NOTTINGHAMSHIRE.

North Nottinghamshire.—Messrs John Holmes, John Walker, T. Hopkinson.

South Nottinghamshire.—Messrs George Storer, W. Chouler, Richard Milward, W. Champion, J. Parkinson, jun., H. Gilbert.

OXFORDSHIRE.

Banbury.—Messrs S. Lovell, J. Gardner, J. Selby.

RUTLANDSHIRE.

Rutland Branch.—Messrs Thomas Spencer, Christopher Smith, Samuel Cheetham.

Uppingham Branch.—Messrs Owsley, Edward Wortley.

SHROPSHIRE, NORTH.

Shropshire.—Four delegates.

Oswestry District.—S. Bickerton, Esq.

SHROPSHIRE, SOUTH.

Bridgnorth.—E. W. Powell, Esq., John Stephens, Esq.

SOMERSETSHIRE, WEST.

Somerset.—Messrs Cridland and Bult, John Wood, H. G. Andrews, R. Hooke, J. Hooke.

Langport and Bridgewater District.—Mr John King, (vice chairman) and Mr T.B. Morle.

STAFFORDSHIRE, NORTH.

Stafford.—Major Chetwynd, Messrs T. Hartshorne, W. T. Lockyer, C. Keeling, J. Nickisson, J. Aston.

STAFFORDSHIRE, SOUTH.

Eccleshall Branch.—Rev. V. G. Yonge, Rev. Charles Mainwaring.

SUFFOLK.

East Suffolk.—Rev. Mr Alston, Messrs John Mosely, N. Barthropp, P. Dykes, W. Bloss.

Ipswich Branch.—C. Lillingston, Esq. Deputy Lieutenant, Messrs T. Haward, W. F. Schrieber, J. Garnall, Venn, W. Back, W. Rodwell, J.D. Everett, Morgan, R. C. Perry, Mark Wade, Rev. F. K. Steward.

Hartismere Branch.—Dr Chevalier, Messrs Samuel Peck and Deck.

Stradbroke District.—W. L. B. Frener, Esq., Rev. A. Cooper.

West Suffolk.—Messrs King, Vrall, Simpson, Woodward, George Gayford.

Cosford Hundred.—Messrs C. Kersey, P. Postans.

Bungay Branch.—Two delegates.

SURREY, EAST.

Kingston.—Messrs G. Nightingale and Daniels.

Croydon Branch.—Messrs Cressingham, (chairman,) Rowland, Raincock, Robinson, Walker, and Gutteridge.

Reigate Branch.—Messrs Peter, Caffyn, Jesse Pym.

Tandridge Hundred Branch.—Messrs Isaac Stavely, Edward Kelsey.

SURREY, WEST.

West Surrey United Association.—Col. Holme Summer, Rowland Goldhawk, Esq.

Epsom District.—Messrs Francis Garner and King.

Dorking District.—Messrs Weller and Dewdney.

SUSSEX, EAST.

Sussex.—Messrs W. Rigden, A. Denman, S. H. Bigg, Edward Wyatt.

East Grinsted.—Messrs George Head, Wm. Turner, John Rose, John Mills, John Payne.

WARWICKSHIRE, NORTH.

Rugby and Dunchurch Branch.—Messrs H. Townsend, John Perkins.

Sutton Coldfield.—The Hon. E. S. Jervis, W. M. Jervis, Esq., Rev. W. K. B. Bedford, Messrs R. Fowler, R. Fowler, jun., Bodington, Sadler, Osborne, Buggins.

Coleshill.—Messrs Cook, Gilbert, H. Thornley, John York, and Dr Davies.

WARWICKSHIRE, SOUTH.

Warwickshire.—Messrs Edward Greaves, C. M. Caldecott, Luke Pearman, J. H. Walker, W. W. Bromfield, R. Hemming, S. Umbers, B. Sedgeley, John Moore, H. Brown.

WILTSHIRE, NORTH.

Messrs G. Brown, W. Ferris, J. A. Williams, R. Strange, J. Wilkes, E. L. Rumbold, L. Waldron.

WILTSHIRE, SOUTH.

Salisbury Branch.—Messrs Stephen Mills, F. King, George Burtt, Leonard Maton, B. Pinnegar,—Lush.

WORCESTERSHIRE, WEST.

Worcestershire Branch.—The Hon. and Rev. W. C. Talbot, F. Woodward, Esq., Richard Gardner.

YORKSHIRE, NORTH RIDING.

Knaresborough.—Mr T. Collins, jun., of Scotton.

Easingwold.—Mr Charles Harland.

YORKSHIRE, EAST RIDING.

East Riding.—Mr John Almack.

Malton.—E. Cayley, Esq.

Holderness.—Messrs Josh. Stickney and G. C. Francis.

Pocklington.— — Cross.

YORKSHIRE, WEST RIDING.

Boroughbridge Branch.—Wm. Josh. Coltman, Esq.

SCOTLAND.

Scottish Protective Association.—Sir J. Drummond, Bart., Professor Aytoun, Professor Low, Dr Gardner, Messrs Geo. Makgill, Jno. Dickson, Jno. Dudgeon, J. Murdoch, J. Shand, Blackwood, Garland, Hugh Watson, Cheyne, Steuart of Auchlunkart.

East Lothian.—Sir Jno. Hall, Bart. of Dunglass, Messrs R. Scot Skirving and Aitchison, of Alderston.

Aberdeenshire.—Dr Garden.

IRELAND.

County Down.—The Marquis of Downshire.

The noble Chairman rose and said—Gentlemen, it will not be necessary for me upon the present occasion to trespass but a few moments upon your attention, because I am happy to say that there are gentlemen much more able to discuss the question upon which we are met here to-day than the individual who now stands before you—more able, I say; but there is no man in the United Kingdom who is more deeply impressed than I am with the conviction that, if this country is to continue to be great and free, moderate import duties must be imposed (loud cheers.) Though some persons have called free trade a "great experiment," and wish us to wait and see what the result of that "experiment" is to be, I tell them fairly now, that that experiment has been tried—that it has failed—and that common sense always said it would fail (great cheering.) But during the trial of this "great experiment," have they calculated the amount of hazard which they are incurring? Are they aware of the mass of landowners and tenant-farmers of England who must be cast away if this experiment is not immediately put an end to? (loud cheers.) We are met here to-day to receive deputations from different parts of the country, and it has been thought advisable to convene this meeting, because doubts have been expressed in Parliament, whether distress was universal or not. We are met to-day to hear from the tenant-farmers from various parts of the country the prospects of their localities (hear, hear.) Gentlemen, I fear those prospects are bad indeed. But still I will say before you that which I stated in Parliament—that I have the greatest confidence in the good feeling of the people of England (cheers.) I believe that the tenant-farmers will follow the advice which I have ventured to give them, and persevere (hear, hear.) They know the justice of their cause. Let you, all of you, when you return home, tell your neighbours to persevere; and depend upon it, justice will, sooner or later, be done to you (loud cheers.) I will not now detain you longer than to say I hope that the expressions which may be made use of here to-day will be to show that, ill used as we are, we are still loyal to our Sovereign, and firmly attached to the constitution of our country (tremendous cheering.)

Mr T. W. BOOKER, Ex-High-Sheriff of Glamorganshire, of Velindra House, near Cardiff, was then called upon by the noble chairman, and amidst great applause stepped forward to propose the first resolution—"That the difficulty and intolerable distress pervading the agricultural and other great interests of the country, and the state of deprivation and suffering to which large masses of the industrial population are reduced, are, in the opinion of this meeting, fraught with consequences the most disastrous to the public welfare, and if not speedily remedied must prove fatal to the maintenance of public credit, will endanger the public peace, and may even place in peril the safety of the state."—Mr Booker spoke as follows: My lord duke, my lords, and gentlemen,—It is, I do most unfeignedly assure you, with the deepest diffidence, if not with the deepest reluctance, that I stand before you thus early in the proceedings of this most eventful day; for, gentlemen, I came here under the sincere hope that I might be allowed to listen to others instead of myself occupying your time. But there are times, and this is an occasion, when I feel that it would ill become any man to shrink from the discharge of a public duty which those with whom he has an identity of feeling and a community of interest will and wish should devolve upon him. Humble, therefore, though my name may be, yet I will, without further apology, proceed at once to the objects which have called us together. (Cheers.) At this time of day, and on this occasion, I need not, I think, enter upon any lengthened argument, nor need I adduce any elaborate statements of statistical facts, to prove that the condition of Great Britain and Ireland and her dependencies is, to say the least, most unsatisfactory. (Hear, hear.) Your own experience will tell you that. Therefore to save your time, and with a knowledge of those who will have to follow me, I will assume three propositions. First of all, I will assume that the agricultural interest is immeasurably the most important interest of the state. (Hear.) Secondly, I will assume that that interest is in a state of alarming and greatly increasing depression. (Hear, hear.) And, thirdly, I will assume that that depression is occasioned and aggravated by the adoption and continuance in that altered policy of the country which now prevails. (Cheers.) I presume that my two first propositions will be conceded to me everywhere; and as to the third, here at least I presume we are unanimous, that the difficulties, the dangers, the distresses, and the disasters that now accompany us are attributable to that vile, suicidal policy falsely called free trade. (Cheers.) Having gone thus far, and having arrived at this point, it will not be of much advantage to you that I should dwell long upon the nature and extent of the distress which now accompanies you, and now environs you. That I will leave to others of those intelligent practical men who, in such multitudinous numbers, have left their homes and have come here to tell, in this central heart of England, their feelings upon the distresses and dangers that have overtaken them. But I will just glance at what is the prevailing symptom of the distress of the present day. And, strange as it may appear, the prevailing symptom is cheapness—cheapness of all the necessaries and conveniences of life—cheapness of the bountiful gifts of Providence, the productions of the earth—cheapness of the works of man, the produce of his skill and labour. And how is it that this cheapness, which augurs plenty and abundance, should not be accompanied with its usual, nay, its invariable concomitants—ease, enjoyment, safety, and repose? (Cheers.) There must be something fundamentally wrong in a state which produces such startling results. It was the opinion of one whose opinion, and whose memory too, ought to be an object of veneration with every Free-trader, as unquestionably they are of respect, from the sterling, amiable, pains-taking qualities of the man—I allude to the late Mr Huskisson—it was his opinion, and he delivered it in his place in the House of Commons so long ago as the year 1815—it was his opinion that nothing could be more delusive than the proposition that cheapness in the price of provisions is always a benefit. On the contrary, cheapness, without a demand for labour, is a symptom of distress. (Cheers.) The French, he adds, in his day, had cheapness without capital, and that was a proof in them of progressive decay. But this all-pervading state of cheapness is so ably glanced at and set forth in a document which I hold in my hand, and which has been transmitted to me since my arrival in town, that I cannot forbear quoting some passages from it. It is the Address of the Metropolitan Trades' Delegates to their fellow-countrymen, on the interests and the present position of the labouring classes of the empire; and if there can be words of solemn warning and import, they are contained in this most extraordinary document. It commences:—

"Fellow-Countrymen,—There is not recorded an era in the history of our country, nor, indeed, in the history of all nations, when the great subject of the natural and social rights of those who live by means of their labour was required to be so thoughtfully considered, so clearly explained, and so zealously and faithfully supported, as the present era."

It afterwards goes on to treat the question of cheapness thus:—

"We have it announced to us that it is under the operation of unregulated, stimulated, and universal competition, we are henceforth to live.

"Cheapness is proclaimed to be the one great and desirable attainment. But the cheapness that is attained under this system is not the result of fair and distributory abundance—being mainly acquired by diminishing the enjoyments, or the consumption, of those by whose labour productions are derived, and by that economy of labour by which, in so many instances, the labourer is cast off altogether from employment, because a cheaper, that is, a less consuming instrument than his body, is invented and applied. The labour of the working man thus becomes a superfluous commodity in the market, so that he must either be an outcast altogether from society, or else find some way of doing more work for less of materials of consumption; and even then, if he should succeed in this course of realising cheapness, he becomes instrumental in bringing many others of his fellow-labourers down to the same degraded level to which he is reduced. (Loud cheers.)

"Bad and appalling, however, as is the existing condition of so many whose only means of supporting themselves and their families is the exercise of their daily labour, yet we maintain that the prospect before us is still more dark and gloomy. We declare to you our conviction that a far greater degree of suffering and of destitution impends over the labouring class and their families, both of this and of all other nations, unless the falseness of the free or competitive system be thoroughly penetrated, clearly exposed, and a course of general commerce, very different from that emanating from the free system, be entered upon." (Great cheers.) In this manner do these practical men, who are practically groaning under the evils of this altered system, dispose of the question of cheapness. The men whose signatures are appended to that document, have done me the honour also of communicating with me since I have been in town, and of stating to me what their intentions and objects are. They write me on the 4th of May inst. that "The delegates have a desire to collect all the statistics in their power showing the decline in the employment of the people, and also showing the gradual falling-off of wages since the introduction of free-trade measures to their respective trades; and also the condition of those trades which have not been directly interfered with by foreign imports, but which the delegates have reason to believe are indirectly affected by the displaced hands, from other industrial branches, continually forcing themselves into the above-mentioned trades—this is the reason they have appealed to all who are friends to native industry for assistance." But, gentlemen, it is said that free trade has not yet had fair play. Most fortunately I am indebted to the kindness and courtesy of a member of parliament, a personal friend of my own, the invaluable member for Falmouth, Mr Gwyn, for the returns of trade and navigation up to the close of last month, which only appeared and were placed in my hands last night. I have gone through these documents with all the business habits that I am capable of; and I come to this conclusion and result, the truth of which I defy any Free-trader to controvert. (Cheers.) The flourishing state of the cotton trade is boasted of. Why, these documents prove to you that the export of cotton goods has increased 10 per cent, but the consumption of cotton altogether has decreased 20 per cent. (Loud cheers.) And what does this show? That there is a decrease in the consumption of cotton of 30 per cent. What! free trade not had fair play! Why, our colonies have had free trade for the last twenty years. For the last ten years they have had the blessing of free and unrestricted trade, and let me appeal to any colonist, what is the universal language which defies even contradiction—We are ruined! (loud cheers.) Our own British possessions get their supplies cheaper from the United States than they can from Great Britain or our North American colonies. They expend the property of their own colonies, and of ours too, which they get there, in fostering the trade of our rivals to the destruction and exclusion of their own. Free trade not had fair play! Why, what have been its effects in Ireland? (hear, hear.) In the year 1844 or 1845, there were of acres cultivated in wheat in Ireland, 1,059,620; but in 1847, the blessed year that followed the consummation of free trade, the number was reduced to 743,871, and in 1848 it was still further reduced to 565,746, thus showing a decrease in three years of the palmy days of free trade of no less than 500,000 acres of wheat, equal to the production of 2,100,000 quarters, and in value, at what ought to be the price of wheat, upwards of six millions sterling. (Shouts of "hear, hear.") This shows with a vengeance that capital is flowing from the banks of the Shannon to the shores of the Vistula (hear, hear.) Free trade not had fair play! What will you, farmers, your wives and daughters, say to this? In the year 1833, the export of salt butter from Ireland was 25,000 tons, in value L.3,000,000 sterling, and it would take 260,000 cows to produce that quantity of butter. Now, let the Free-traders tell us what has been the export of salt butter from Ireland during the last year (hear, hear.) Ireland has broken up her old pastures, and has sown wheat upon them; and yet with all that forced and ruinous cultivation, the foreigner beats her out-and-out. But it is only a waste of time to go through the extent and the nature of the distress which afflicts you. I will no longer dilate upon it. I will leave its effects upon England to those admirable men whose public spirit and whose private wrongs have brought them here. And I will at once ask, what is to be the remedy? You will answer me with one acclaim, There can be but one, and that is a return to the policy of protection to native industry (cheers.) And how is this remedy to be attained? Why, by a cordial union of all classes whose labour has been invaded, and the produce of whose skill, enterprise, and industry has been excluded by that vile policy which has supplanted us in our own markets. I presume, and I say it with all respect and deep humility, that you can have no remaining hope from the present parliament (cheers), nor from the present advisers of the Crown (tremendous cheering.) But we have a constitutional sovereign, who well knows that her own peace and happiness depend upon the welfare and prosperity of her people. She well knows that upon that peace and prosperity, not only her own happiness, but the security of her throne (cheers,) and the stability of the monarchy that she administers, all alike depend (cheers.) Let us carry to the foot of the throne the wishes of her faithful people. Let us tell her of the distress and difficulties that are overtaking the industrious cultivators of the soil of the empire which she benignly governs. (Loud cries of "hear.") Let us tell her of the dangers and disasters that environ the hard-working, industrious occupiers of the territorial domains of the ancient nobility and gentry of her land (hear, hear.) Let us tell her, as the noble duke said, that, although oppressed, we are still faithful—still uncompromising—still unswerving—still unseduceable—still loyal and true to her; and I will stake my life on it, that she will be compassionate and true to us (hear, hear.) The humble individual who now addresses you is no proud aristocrat—he is no lordly possessor of wide-spread territorial domains; but he has obtained his fortune by the active pursuits of commercial industry (hear, hear.) He affords daily employment to hundreds, and thousands are dependent for their daily bread on his care and success (hear, hear.) I hope, therefore, that I speak with a due sense of the responsibility of my words and actions; and I desire—and, with God's blessing, I shall use every energy and talent that my Maker has endowed me with (loud cheers)—I desire, and with God's help, I shall endeavour to transmit to my children's children unimpaired those laws and liberties, those customs and institutions, which have afforded me protection during my own career of successful toil (cheers.) You will take one word of counsel from me. You, the owners and industrious occupiers of the soil, will, I hope, from this vast assembly hurl back with proud defiance that gross threat, that, if success should attend your exertions for a restoration of protection, the foundations of property would be shaken to their centre (hear, hear.) Such is the language used by Free-traders in fustian, in words as well as in merchandise (hear, hear.) Ay, forsooth, by the apostle of peace, who would have the manly quarrels of nations, as well as of individuals, settled by palaver and humbug, instead of musketry and gunpowder (great cheering.) Hurl back, I say, that defiance, and let your answer reach the ears of all who dare to obstruct the exercise of free discussion, and the results of free discussion in this hitherto free and prosperous land (hear.) But, in the struggle that must of necessity ensue before we can obtain the gracious accession of our beloved Sovereign to the prayers of her people, it may and will happen that our friends who, amidst treachery and desertion unparalleled (hear, hear,) had stood firm and faithful to their principles and professions, may be inconvenienced, and that their seats in the legislature may be jeopardised by the miscellaneous onslaught of our ministerial and jacobinical opponents (hear, hear.) But this must not, this shall not, be; for these men must be protected at the hustings (hear, hear.) When I look at this vast, this magnificent assemblage—when I consider whom and what it represents—I cannot for a moment doubt that there are, in the ranks of the protectionists of England, Ireland, Wales, and Scotland, a thousand men who will put down their hundred pounds a-piece to form a fund against all aggressors (hear, hear.) For myself, I shall at once avow that I will be one, either of a thousand to put down my hundred pounds (hear, hear,) or, if need be, I will be one of a hundred to put down my thousand pounds (loud cheers,) for this national, this necessary object. And then having done our duty, and having among our hereditary legislators a Richmond (cheers,) a Stanhope (hear,) a Stanley (cheers,) an Eglinton, a Talbot, a Downshire, a Malmesbury, a Beaufort, and a host of others, who will forgive me if I now fail to name them; and a Disraeli (great cheering followed the mention of Mr Disraeli's name,) a Granby (hear, hear,) a Manners (hear, hear,) a Beresford, a Stuart, a Newdegate, and many more such whom we will send to aid them in the House of Commons, let us commit our cause, the cause of peace and plenty, the cause of truth and justice (cheers,) the sacred cause of protection to native industry and capital (hear, hear)—let us commend that cause to our Sovereign, to our country, and to our God (loud cheers.) My lords and gentlemen, I must apologise for the undue length at which I have addressed you. I thank you most cordially for the kindness and the enthusiasm with which you have listened to me, and I now beg to propose the resolution with which I have the honour to be intrusted.

The honourable gentleman sat down amidst the most deafening cheers.

Mr W. CHOULER, South Muskham, Newark, Notts, in rising to second the resolution, said he should not waste their time by offering any apologies for his unfitness to address them upon that occasion. He had come forward to state facts, and he should at once proceed to discharge that duty to the best of his ability. He should first of all advert to the state of the labourers in his own immediate neighbourhood. He could state that the wages of those labourers had of late been reduced nominally from 12s. to 10s., and in some parts of the county to 9s. a-week; while the real reduction was much greater, because, in consequence of the depressed condition of their employers, they had been deprived of that piece-work by which they had formerly earned a further sum of 1s. or 2s. a-week. Since he had come to London he had received a statement of the condition of the labourers in a part of Leicestershire which adjoined South Nottinghamshire, and from that statement he found that during the winter there had been many unemployed labourers in that district; and that latterly, even at the approach of the spring-time, eight of those labourers had been going about begging. They had not asked, however, for alms, but for employment, by which they could have obtained an honest livelihood for themselves and their families. (Hear, hear.) Now, he appealed to every one whom he was addressing, whether a cultivator of the soil could be placed in a more heartrending situation than when he found himself unable to afford employment to an honest and industrious, but necessitous labourer? But, feeling dissatisfied with things at home, he had taken some trouble to ascertain how the labourers are situated in other districts with which he had no immediate connexion. As a matter of course, he had thought that the place in which he might expect to find perfection was the estate of Sir Robert Peel. (Loud cries of "hear, hear," jeers, and laughter.) He had read the document issued some time since by Sir Robert Peel to his tenantry, and through his tenantry to the country at large; and from the wording of that document he had been led to suppose that in the parish of Kingsbury, the property of Sir Robert Peel, the labourers were fully employed, well housed, and well fed. But he would tell them what he had seen there only a few days ago. The parish of Kingsbury was an extensive one, and the farms there were large, for that part of the country, as they varied from 300 to 400 acres. But instead of the labourers in Kingsbury being lodged in comfortable cottages, he found scarcely any labourers' cottages upon the estate. There were no small holdings, no cottage allotments in the parish; and he had been told that the labourers employed in it resided at a distance of two or three miles from the place. The fact was, that for some years a system had been carried on in that parish for reducing the number of its agricultural labourers, (hear, hear,) and removing the poor off the property. He confessed he only wondered that the "Times Commissioner" had not been down there (hear, and laughter,) to tell the tenantry how much of the physical force of the labourer was lost by living so far from his work. But he had found worse than that. He had found that English labourers were being gradually displaced by low-priced Irish labourers. He had found that the tenants of Sir Robert Peel had been employing during the winter, is well as during the summer, six or eight Irish labourers each, to whom they paid little or no money wages. (Cries of "shame.") Now he should not have thought much about that if he had found that the Irish labourers were prospering, as they are British subjects; but he had seen them in a very wretched condition, to which the English labourers also were being rapidly reduced. The Irish there have no house to live in, no bed to lie on, or fire to go to, but lay on straw in an outhouse; therefore this system has this tendency,—to depress the English labourer to the Irish or Continental level, without elevating the other. He would pass, however, from the parish of Kingsbury to a district represented by another lion of the day. (A laugh.) They would recollect that Mr C. Villiers, the member for Wolverhampton, had stated at the commencement of the session that there had been L.91,000,000 a-year saved to the country by the fall in prices which had followed the adoption of the free-trade policy. Now it had occurred to him that the constituents of Mr Villiers must have obtained a pretty good share of that sum. But he had found that in Wolverhampton the poor-rates had been gradually increasing during the last eight or ten years. It appeared that, during the twelve months ending in March 1842, the poor-rates in the union of Wolverhampton had not amounted to half the sum which they had reached during the twelve months ending in March 1850. It further appeared that in the year ending March 25, 1849, they had amounted to only L.10,007, while in the year ending March 25, 1850, they had amounted to L.11,625. He had mentioned these facts for the purpose of showing that the people of Wolverhampton had derived no advantage from the supposed saving of L.91,000,000 a-year effected by the adoption of a free-trade policy. But he said, without fear of contradiction, that no such saving had been made. He admitted that that sum had been lost to one class in this country (hear, hear,) but he denied that it had been gained by any other. (Cheers and laughter.) Lord John Russell said last Friday night week, that if Mr Henley brought forward a direct motion in favour of protection, he should be prepared to show that the great mass of the people were in possession of as great comforts as they ever had been. Now this was three months after the country had been said to have been the gainer of L.91,000,000 a-year, and yet all that Lord John Russell could say was that the people were in "as good" a position as ever they were. He would admit, if necessary, that this sum had been lost to one class, but it had not been gained by another. He should not be so much dissatisfied if the farmers had lost it, if only some other class had gained it. But the farmers had lost it and no one in this country had gained it. (Cheers.) Two-thirds of the people of this country were engaged in agricultural pursuits, and could any policy, he would ask, be more suicidal than to deprive them of L.91,000,000 a-year, without conferring any benefit on the remaining one-third of the population? (Hear, hear.) He had no hesitation in saying that the agriculturists, as a body, had never been in a worse position than that in which they were at present placed. He felt convinced that, if the existing prices for agricultural produce were to continue much longer, the tenant-farmers would be wholly unable to afford full employment to labourers; great efforts had been made last winter to employ the labourers; and when parliament met we were told, because we had employed them, that there was no distress. But if the class of able-bodied labourers were offered no alternative but to perish from destitution or to enter the workhouse, he had no hesitation in saying that this country would soon be reduced to a state which he should be most sorry to witness. Already the agricultural labourers talked of combinations; and although the farmers might be able to stem the torrent by affording them employment until the termination of the harvest, he could not help anticipating the most serious perils after that period. The labourers did not blame the farmers for their condition, for they were well aware that the farmers had not the means for affording them employment; and under those circumstances, could it be expected that the farmers would mount their horses for the purpose of opposing the just demands of their humbler fellow-countrymen? (Hear, hear.) If a man was willing and able to work in this country, he had a right to have the means of living in comfort in it. (Hear, hear.) Mr Cobden had said what he would do if a system of protection were re-established, and what would then become of the landlords. But I will say openly and publicly, that if the landlords will stick to us, we will stick to them. (Loud and enthusiastic cheers.) But I will go further than that—I have not yet quite finished the subject. We own nine-tenths of the horses of the kingdom, and we have the men to ride upon them. (Vociferous cheering.) And we go further still: we will support the Crown as well as the landlords. (Cheers.) Her Majesty need not fear, if she turn her back upon the towns, that she will not be supported. Protected ourselves, we will protect her against all assailants. (Loud cheers.) Mr Chouler then proceeded to say that, in his opinion, it matters not what prices were, provided all interests were placed upon the same footing. But if one interest were reduced below another, if employment were lessened whilst taxation was kept up, if more money left the country than came into it, the result must be beggary. (Cries of "Hear," and "Now for the rents.") He would come to that directly; but first stop a bit. (Laughter.) He had not quite done yet, (cheers;) but would mention to them the case of a tenant-farmer who had applied to him for advice as to what he should do under his present circumstances. This gentleman occupied three farms, had a large family, and employed a good deal of capital. The ages of his children varied from 24 to 9. He stated that his wheat wanted hoeing, and that he had no money to do it with; that he intended to have placed his family on the farms, but that if he were to do so they could not live. What could he do with them? Some of them were too old to be put to trades, and then, if he were to take out his capital, all his dead stock would go almost for nothing. He (Mr Chouler) knew he could not do anything for him. The man was a good cultivator, in good circumstances, and that was the case of hundreds and thousands of tenant-farmers. (Hear, hear.) Rent had been alluded to by some one just now. He had always regarded rent as a private bargain between two individuals. He did not come there to find fault with either his own landlord or the landlord class generally, because, as a class, he had seen them act as the very best friends of the people. But he did think that in this particular movement, latterly, they had left it almost entirely not only to the tenants to do the work—that he should not care anything about; but to defray all the expenses. (Cheers and laughter.) Now, if the tenant-farmer could not cultivate his land properly, his labourers and himself would get worse off, and he would be in a worse position to pay his rent, his tithes, and his taxes; and if no tithes and rent were paid, how are the clergy and aristocracy to pay their taxes and servants? (Cheers.) With regard to taxes, he would ask, was there a class of men in any other country who produced an article that was taxed from 75 to 100 per cent, before they could use it themselves? for that was the case with the malt-tax in this country at the present moment. (Cheers.) Sir Robert Peel had told them that the food of the labouring man should be free from taxation; but what was the fact? Why, he held in his hand a list of no less than 15 articles, all of which were eatables or drinkables, and necessaries to the poor man, which had to pay taxes at this moment. They were—butter, cheese, cocoa, coffee, corn and meal, eggs, fruits, hams, rice, spices, spirits, sugar, refined ditto, molasses, and tea; and they produced a revenue to the country of L.13,677,795. And yet this "wiseacre" had said that the food of the working man should be free from taxation. In addition to that, there were the articles of tobacco and snuff, which produced upwards of L.4,000,000 more. (Hear.) And was not tobacco a necessity of the working man? (Hear, hear.) Well, that brought the amount up to L.18,000,000 sterling, or more than one-third of the whole of the general taxation of the country, raised upon articles of food. (Laughter and cheers.) With regard to the malt tax, he thought that no impost was more unjust, because there was not a great quantity of malt liquor consumed by the higher classes, the greater portion being consumed by the working classes; and, with the exception of one or two cyder counties, malt liquor, in one shape or other, was the universal beverage of the labourers. But beer must be taxed, forsooth! That was not the food of the people! (Hear.) There is only one other point (continued Mr Chouler) upon which I will make an observation, and that is with reference to the great "Exhibition" of 1851. (Oh, oh! groans and hisses.) I have heard of many curious things in my lifetime; but there is one thing which I have always regarded as visionary, or as never having had an existence—but it has actually been realised in this 19th century, and in this great city—ay, in this year of grace 1850—a "mare's" (mayor's) nest has been discovered. (Roars of laughter.) Yes; and in this "mayor's nest" was "the Prince," and what does "the Prince" say? Now I beg that it may be distinctly understood that I mean no disrespect to my Sovereign or the Prince; but I came here to speak the truth, and I have spoken it fearlessly, and the truth I will know before I go home. The Prince says that, when you get the productions of all countries and nations before you, you have only to choose which is the cheapest and the best. Well, if you are to do that, is it not to show you that you have the opportunity of buying them? (Hear, hear.) A little umbrage has been taken at this exhibition as savouring somewhat of free-trade, and the royal commissioners have told us that they do not intend that the articles shall be sold, but that they shall be merely shown. But do you believe that the foreigner will bring his produce across the Channel or the Atlantic, and take it back again without receiving English money for it? Now, I want to know who does speak the truth? (Cries of "the Prince.") I suppose the Prince does. (Shouts of "no.") Well, well, have it as you like. (Roars of laughter.) I am come here as a delegate from the part of the country in which I reside. I came to seek the truth, and I will know it and declare it. I ask, is the foreign corn that will be imported into England in the year 1851, to come in and be looked at without being sold? (Loud cheers.) What will the foreigner say? Why, he will say "I care nothing about your 'looks,' give me your money" (Cheers and laughter.) That is what he will say. It is my duty then to ascertain whether or not it is intended still to encourage the sending out of the country money which it would be better to circulate at home. And I hope I am not exceeding my functions as a delegate in asking that question. Now you have heard my opinions upon this subject, and the concluding remarks I shall make are these: that without an alteration this country will be so shaken—after harvest, mind you, as there will be a good deal of work until then, not before—that I am perfectly confident it will be totally impossible to preserve the public peace. (Loud cheers.) I am not surprised at untruths coming from the royal commission, considering whom that commission is composed of, when I find Peel and Cobden amongst them. (Groans and hisses.) There is one name amongst them, however, which I am always in the habit of speaking of with respect and honour, and that is the name of Lord Stanley. (Cheers.) How far he will come out from among these royal commissioners without harm (bravo, loud cheers, and laughter,) from such a den of—you must supply the rest—I do not know, but I have confidence in the man. (Loud cheers, and great laughter.)

The resolution was put from the chair, and carried unanimously.

Mr EDWARD BALL, Burwell, Cambridgeshire, then moved the next resolution:—"That the indifference with which the just complaints of the people have been received by the House of Commons, its disinclination to adopt any measures for removing or alleviating the existing distress; and the want of sympathy it has exhibited for the sufferings of the people, have produced a widely-diffused feeling of disappointment, discontent, and distrust, which is fast undermining their reliance on the justice and wisdom of Parliament, the best security for loyalty to the Throne, and for the maintenance of the invaluable institutions of the country." The attendance of the noble duke this day, observed Mr Ball, imposes a fresh debt of gratitude upon us, and realises the hope we entertain, that whenever there is a grand field day he will be found in his right position—at the head of the troops. As our great commander, it is obligatory upon us that we should observe his orders, and one of those orders is, that we should express ourselves temperately and with moderation. (Hear, hear.) But I am sure that, from his experience of the field of conflict, he knows that sometimes the ardour and zeal of the British troops carry them somewhat beyond the exact line marked out by their leader and chief. (Cheers.) And if we should be found upon this occasion to advance a little beyond that strict line of propriety which he has chalked out for us, his kindness will excuse it when he knows that it is out of the fulness of our hearts, and the deep distress in which we are plunged, that we are assembled to-day to make our representations and complaints. (Cheers.) Coming, then, to the resolution which I have to propose, I ask is the allegation contained in it true? For if the thing stated in it be not true, it is useless for us to use it as an argument in justification of our assembling here to-day. Is it true? (Cries of "Yes; it is true.") Is it true that the House of Commons has shown great disregard to our petitions? (Cheers.) Is it true that it has rushed on heedless of the entreaties of the whole body of agriculturists, and passed a measure which it was elected for the very end and purpose of preventing? This (proceeded Mr Ball) constituted the bitterness of their grief, that when Lord John Russell's commercial measures of 1841 were defeated, a new parliament was called, and the voice of the nation proclaimed through that parliament against free trade—that the great mass of the constituencies rallied around the banner of protection—that they raised such a number of men to represent them in the House of Commons, that Lord J. Russell was obliged to throw up the reins of government into the hands of Sir Robert Peel, who took the leadership of the House of Commons with a good majority of 100, who were thought truly and honourably to represent the agricultural interest, and ready to protect their cause. (Cheers.) Then he wanted to know if the complaint in the resolution was not just when they saw that very house, which was congregated for the express purpose of maintaining protection, unhesitatingly strike that protection down, defeat all their objects, blast all their hopes, and prove untrue and unfaithful to the great constituencies of the empire. (Loud cheers.) I say, exclaimed Mr Ball, that we will never cease to represent that it was not by fair and legitimate means that we were beaten (cheers;) but that it was by the unfair, the foul play, the treacherous betrayal of those who had headed us to lead us on to victory, but who conducted the enemy into the camp, introduced the foe into the citadel, and destroyed all our hopes and prospects. (Loud cheers.) That being true, what is the language of the Free-trader upon the occasion? He sees a consequence that he never anticipated. He sees the result which we pointed out, and which he disbelieved. He finds that prices are as ruinous as we stated that they would be, and that free trade is as great a hindrance to the welfare of agriculture as we always reported that it would be. And now how does he shelter himself? Instead of coming forward, and honestly saying we have failed—it was only an experiment, which was forced upon us, and having made an error we will endeavour to correct it—he says that it is an exceptional case; that it is not the legitimate consequence, but that there are some particular circumstances which make the principles of free trade press with unusual severity just now. (Hear, and oh.) Now, look at the reasoning of this. If the foreigner, when he had no hope of such a market being opened to him, could for the last two years send in a supply of nearly twenty-two million quarters of various descriptions of corn, and if he could do that out of his surplus produce, what will he do now that he has the market entirely open to him—when he has got our capital to improve his cultivation, and when he knows that he may produce and send an unlimited quantity into our markets? (Hear.) I want to know how it is that, with an express declaration of the principles of the people upon the question of free trade, the landlords in the House of Lords and in the House of Commons, contrary to their own creed and in opposition to their own judgment, swerved from all that they had promised us, and threw up to those who were more impassioned and boisterous than themselves all that protection which they were bound in honour and in interest to uphold? (Loud cheers.) I feel that it is painful to speak of the landlords of this kingdom in the presence of so many of that aristocracy who shed a lustre upon their order, and whose presence here shows us how much they respond to our own principles. (Cheers.) We can never forget that those laurels which adorn the brow of the noble duke who presides over us were won in the most terrible and hard-fought encounters that ever brought glory, honour, and renown to the British arms, and that the noble duke has, from the period that he turned his sword into a ploughshare, ever stood true to the best interests of agriculture—(loud cheers)—has ever stood true to the declarations which he has made; and under all changes, and in the midst of the vapourings of his opponents, has been steadfast, untarnished, and unsullied, and now comes before us with renewed glory and increased claims upon our gratitude and support. (Loud cheers.) We cannot forget that the noble lord on his right—the Earl Stanhope—(great cheering)—whom it has been my privilege for five-and-twenty years to follow in the paths of philanthropy—who has come to the evening of a long and a useful life, in which he has shown sympathy to the poor, and has had the best interests of his fellow-men at heart—that he comes here, too, for the purpose of giving his powerful support to the great principles to which he and we are alike devoted. (Loud cheers.) They had also several other noble and honourable gentlemen present. They all knew the undaunted courage with which the Marquis of Downshire had fought for their right. They knew that the gentlemen around him were noble exceptions to that great defalcation which had been committed by so large a portion of the aristocracy. (Cheers.) Therefore, he (Mr Ball) could not discharge what he considered to be his duty now, without pointing them out as exceptions to the statement he was about to make—that they had fallen, not by Cobden's—that they had fallen, not by the League's tricks—that they had fallen, not by the treachery of Peel; but because their landlords—the aristocracy—those who should have upheld them—had swerved from their duty in the houses of Parliament. (Cheers.) We had the power—we had the majority—we had the voice of the country, not loud, but strong and firm, and ready to manifest itself when the moment for action came; but they were faint-hearted, they failed in the hour of need, and sacrificed us to the discordant elements of demagogueism and free-tradeism. (Uproarious cheering.) Moreover, they have contrived to take the full tale from the poverty and the debilitated circumstances of a struggling tenantry. (Loud cheers.) Let me put this simple case to you. I take the free-trade landlord, and I take the tenant-farmer. They are in partnership, are engaged in the same pursuit, and have a joint interest in the same property. A is the landlord, B the tenant-farmer. A comes to B and says, "We must make an experiment upon this land. We must introduce certain fresh modes of cultivation. We must change our plan; and if we do so-and-so you will farm better, my rent will be more secure, and we shall be altogether in more favourable circumstances than before." B, the tenant, says, "No, it is too frightful an experiment. No, it may involve me in ruin. No, you risk nothing—I risk all." (Great cheering.) But A is the richer man—A has the greater power, and he insists upon the experiment being made, in spite of the tears and protestations of the tenant. In the legislature A assents that the experiment shall be made. Thus he sweeps away and brings down to ruin the tenant who, in his wretchedness, looks up to the landlord for relief; and I do say that, according to the immutable principles of justice, and on the ground of what is due from man to man, the landlord, who is a party to the passing of free-trade measures, is bound to sustain and uphold his tenant, and reimburse his losses. (Vehement cheers.) I want to know, also, if I have L.5000, L.10,000, or L.20,000, placed in the funds, and a similar sum invested in the land, both of them being sustained and supported by the law—I want to know if the land be to pay the interest of the national debt, whether it is fair and just to take away the income out of which the interest of the national debt is to be paid, and what right or justice there is in demanding the full payment of the national debt? (Loud cheers.) If the fundholder has looked on and encouraged the movement which was made to bring us to ruin, I want to know with what propriety or consistency he can ask to gather out of our ruined means the wealth which, under other circumstances, we would gladly and cheerfully pay him? (Cheers.) But we are told that our landlords cannot now reverse this policy—that they have gone too far to recede—and Cobden, in that celebrated speech of his, which he made at the close of last year in Leeds, said "Only let the agriculturist come forward and put on one shilling in the shape of corn duty, and I will create such a tumult as shall shake the kingdom to its centre." (Laughter.) Most deliberately and dispassionately my answer to that is—The sooner the better! (Tremendous cheering; the whole of the vast assemblage rising to their feet, and waving their hat and hands.) I say that we have a conscience, that we have a superintending Providence, that we have laws violated, that we have all these things which will sustain and give endurance to us in any conflict that may approach; and that, therefore, we may laugh at all threatenings, and set them at defiance. (Loud cheering.) But what have the tenant-farmers to fear at the approach of discord? Can you be worse off? (No, no.) Can any alteration damage you? (Renewed cries of "no no.") All is lost! Persevere in your free-trade laws, and there is no concealing the fact that, as a class, we are swept away. (Hear.) Persevere in those laws, our homes will be taken from us. Persevere in those laws, our wives will be without protection. Persevere in those laws, our children will become paupers. (Cheers.) Will you then tell me, when laws have been enacted that reduce me to that position, that I, a broken-hearted man, passing into poverty and my family degraded, that I shall fear the threats of a demagogue? (Much cheering.) My answer for the whole body of the tenantry of the country is this—that we are disposed to risk all, brave all, dare all! (vociferous cheering, again and again repeated;) and that we are prepared, come what will, and cost what it may, at the hour of our country's peril, for our homes, our wives, and our families, to take those terrible steps which are the most frightful for a good and peaceable man to imagine, but which necessity and unjust treatment hurry us on and bring us to the contemplation of. (Vehement plaudits.) The most abominable part of it is this, however. If it had been a calamity brought on in the Providence of God—by the failure of the seasons, or by something which was above legislative control, we would have humbly bowed to it. But here comes the scourge—we fell through the cowardice and faint-heartedness of him whom we considered to be the greatest of modern statesmen; and when the history of the age that is passing has been recorded, it will tell us that at the same period there was in Italy a man (Count Rossi) who had been appointed minister of the Pope; that he was the witness of a rising tumult and a coming desolation; and that on the very morning of his death he was told not to go to the Senate, for if he did so there would be danger attending him. His reply was, "I have taken office—and when I did that, I took not only its honours and emoluments, but its duties and its dangers." He went to the Senate, and perished upon the steps of the Forum. But our statesman (Sir Robert Peel) saw the approach of the storm, quailed at the tempest, bowed down to the lowering cloud, dishonoured the country, brought infamy upon his own name, and poverty upon the people. (Great cheering.)

Mr J. ALLIN WILLIAMS, of Wiltshire, seconded the resolution. He stood before them that day as a Wiltshire farmer, second to none in the kingdom in his loyalty and attachment to the throne and his love of the constitution of old England. (Cheers.) Moreover, he stood before them deputed by the farmers of the county of Wilts, for the purpose of protesting against the treatment to which the occupiers of the soil of Great Britain, as a class, had been subjected by the measures of her Majesty's Ministers and by the House of Commons. (Cheers.) He wished he could think that those measures and their consequences had been properly considered and contemplated by their framers before they were brought forward. Despite the remonstrances of the defenders of the agricultural interest in the House of Commons, and of the noble duke in the chair, and of other noblemen in the Upper House of the Legislature, her Majesty's Ministers persisted in those measures which must ultimately reduce the tenantry of England to beggary. (Hear, hear.) An individual, whom he would not name, as his name appeared to grate upon the ears of every honest farmer in this country—(cheers)—but whom it was impossible to forget, as he had laid down maxims which they felt obliged to take up and consider—a few years ago that individual laid down, as a rule, that the British farmer could not grow wheat in this kingdom under 56s. per quarter. (Hear, hear.) And upon the faith of that statement many of the men that he saw before him, himself included, had entered into agreements with their landlords for the purpose of occupying their estates for a certain period of years. (Hear, hear.) He himself had taken a lease for 14 years. What, then, must be the condition of the farmers of those estates when they were obliged to sell wheat at 36s. per quarter? The consequence was, that all, or the greater part of those who were similarly situated with himself, must be ruined. Upon the same figures was also based the Tithe Commutation Act; and by that act, which, as they too well knew, was ruled by a septennial clause, last year, when they were selling their wheat at the price of two guineas per quarter, they were compelled to pay after the rate of 54s. 10d. per quarter as the tithe of their produce; and this year, when they were selling their wheat at from 36s. to 40s. per quarter, they had to pay upon an average of 53s. (Hear, hear.) It was on that account that he came there to proclaim that her Majesty's Ministers had done the farmers a great piece of injustice, and that they had in fact emptied the pockets of the British farmers by their legislation. If there had been a necessity for the late Free-trade measures, (and he denied that there was any such necessity,) he contended that every portion of the community ought to have been made to bear a fair share of the burdens which had been placed upon the agriculturists. But what was the fact? He maintained that the industrious classes, the producers, alone were made to feel the burden, and that property and capital were wholly exempt. (Hear, hear.) The Free-traders, when proposing their ruinous measures, appear to have made a grand discovery, and assert, that we have no right to tax the food of the people. But did it ever enter their brains that on the wheat produced by the British farmer he paid a large tax in the shape of the superior wages paid to the labourers as compared with those of the labourers of the foreigner, to meet the taxes that are imposed on them upon the necessaries of life? That in fact the proportion of labour in a quarter of wheat (which he would assert to be two-thirds) was taxed to the enormous extent of 33 per cent? (Hear, hear, hear.) Again, was not the wheat produced by the British farmer taxed by the poor rates, the highway rates, &c.? and the heavy rents which he paid as compared with the foreign farmer, (such rents as were not heard of in any other country in the world,) was it not on account of the heavy taxes the landlords had to pay? If these things never entered the brains of her Majesty's Ministers, they were no men of business. (Hear, hear.) If they did enter into their brains, then their conduct was most knavish, most scandalous; for thereby they compelled the farmers of England to compete on most unequal terms with the foreigner. (Hear, hear.) The aristocracy of this country, he regretted to say, had not as a body done their duty in this matter. (Hear, hear.) Had the farmers of England had the aristocracy and the clergy of the country with them, they might easily have resisted the iniquitous measures of the Free-traders, and they would not have been in their present deplorable condition. (Cheers.) But now let them look for a remedy. Let them from that day call forth those men who had hitherto been blind and apathetic as regarded their own best interests, as well as those of their own immediate dependents. Let them call upon the landed gentry and the clergy throughout the country to do their duty. (Hear, hear.) He thought he might say with confidence, if they responded to that call, that the agricultural interest had nothing to fear. If nothing else would rouse the aristocracy of the country to a proper attention to their vital interests, as well as those of their common country, surely the insolent language of Mr Cobden at Leeds was enough to rouse them from their lethargy. But if they still refused to do their duty, he would call upon them, in the language of Milton, to

"Awake! arise! or be for ever fallen."

(Cheers.) He knew that time was pressing on, and that he must be brief. He would therefore conclude by again protesting against the treatment they had received, and most heartily seconding the resolution which had been proposed to them by Mr Ball. But he could not resume his seat before he had conjured them to send Whig principles to the winds. (Laughter and cheers.) His belief was, that Dr Samuel Johnson never made so happy a hit in his definition of those principles, as when he said that the devil was the first Whig. (Great laughter and cheers.)

The resolution was then put and unanimously carried.

Professor AYTOUN, of Edinburgh then came forward, amidst loud cheering, to propose the following resolution:—"That this meeting attributes the depression and distress of the agricultural, colonial, shipping, and other interests to the rash and impolitic changes in the laws which had long regulated the importation of foreign productions; that it is of opinion that those laws were based on the most just principles, and dictated by the soundest policy; that, under their salutary influence, the British nation had attained an unexampled state of prosperity, and a proud pre-eminence in the scale of nations; and that if their object and spirit in fostering and protecting native industry be finally abandoned, many of the most important interests of the state will be sacrificed, and the national prosperity and greatness be ruinously impaired." The learned Professor proceeded as follows:—Gentlemen, I have been desired, perhaps, rather than requested, on the part of the Scottish Protective Association, (hear, hear,) to attend this meeting, and to move one of the resolutions. I most sincerely wish that the task had been confided to abler hands than mine; but all of us have a distinct duty to perform; and those of my countrymen who act with me feel that, on such an occasion as this, it would be wrong and faint-hearted if Scotland, which is so deeply interested in the grand question of protection to native industry, were to hang back, and refuse to come forward to testify to you and to the tenantry of England that our zeal in this cause is as great, our feeling as decided, our determination as strong as your own. (Cheers.) I cannot offer to you the testimony of a practical agriculturist, but, perhaps, I may be allowed to say that I do not consider this is a meeting entirely of agriculturists. (Hear, hear.) Every man in this nation, from the lowest to the highest, has, I conceive, a distinct stake in this question. Every man, whatever be his occupation or his calling, is entitled to come forward here and declare his opinion upon those measures which have been thrust on the nation by an act of perfidy and treachery, to find a parallel for which we shall search the pages of history in vain. (Hear, hear.) I do not exaggerate our case when I say that Scotland is, if possible, more interested than England in the maintenance or the restoration of protection to native industry. Far later in point of time were our fields broken up, our moors reclaimed, our morasses drained; and the prosperity of Scotland, great as it has been, can hardly be reckoned as of older date than the last seventy years. Glasgow, the largest city of Scotland, the second city of the United Kingdom, rose to its present high wealth and distinction by its colonial connexion within a comparatively recent period. Our counties and our towns are alike interested in this matter. The "transition state" of suffering which our opponents now affect to have foreseen as the inevitable result of their measures—though they took especial care to conceal that revelation from every human eye—is more than beginning to make itself felt in the latter: in the former, it is evident and undenied, and already, I am sorry to say, in our remote Highland districts the work of desolation has begun. They may call it peace if they please; it is not peace, alas! it is solitude. (Hear, hear.) Now, there are certain things you have imported from Scotland for which perhaps you may not thank us very much, and one of those things is a certain race called Political Economists. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) I do not, however, wish to include among the number the father of political economy, Adam Smith, now in his grave three-quarters of a century, who wrote at a time and under circumstances very different from those in which we are at present placed. I observe that Mr Cobden is going about the country with the works, as he says, of Adam Smith in his hands, and favouring the public with his comments on those works; but I hope those comments will be taken by the public, as I take them, at their true value—estimating the quality of the text at a different ratio from the perverted interpretations of the expounder. There is another Scottish Political Economist, Mr M'Culloch, who has written a great deal on the subject of the corn trade, and who has been hitherto, during his long life, a decided enemy to all restrictive duties; but who, I believe, is now discovering at the last hour, that he has been going too fast in his views, and that the total withdrawal of protection is not likely to do all the good which he had at one time anticipated from it. Then, there is another gentleman, who is an ornament to the present House of Commons—the illustrious Mr Macgregor, (roars of laughter,) the gifted and infallible seer, who won the suffrages of a benighted city by telling its electors from the hustings that the nation was to increase in wealth, under the free-trade system, at the rate of precisely L.2,000,000 a-week. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) That was to be the national gain; a gain in which we were all to participate the moment the corn laws were swept away. Mr Macgregor also told the people of Glasgow that in this matter he was the political tutor of Sir R. Peel, (hear, hear, and laughter;) that he, the two million a-week man, was the individual who laid down that grand plan under which we are all at present suffering. If that be true, all I shall remark is this, that surely never did any pupil select so singular a master. Under these circumstances, I must admit that, however we may be entitled to appear here as a deputation, one gift which we have sent you from Scotland, in the shape of political economists, is a gift for which you cannot be very thankful. This is, I may add, an age in which men have been more befooled by figures than by anything else which we can mention. (Hear) Half a century ago, when any extraordinary account appeared in the newspapers, it used to be said that it must be true because it was to be found in print. Now, that delusion seems to have passed away; the charm of infallibility is broken, and people do not at present suppose that the press has got any particular exemption from error. But a delusion quite as great, and even more baneful, still prevails with respect to figures. There are men seated in their closets, with blue-books before them, casting up long columns of accounts, and making out statements which they call statistics, which are to form the invariable rules by which mankind is to be governed, and by which the commerce of this country is to be regulated; and it is by putting their noxious dogmas into effect that this country has of late been exposed to so much suffering. The system is older even than the days of Adam Smith; for about a century ago there went forth from Edinburgh a man of the name of John Law, the founder of the famous Mississippi scheme—a scheme for enriching men by foreign trade and for conferring on them fortunes at once, while it did away with native industry. History has its cycles, and we have again arrived at a period when quackery and imposture have usurped the place of sound common-sense, of wise policy, and I fear not to add, of truthful and Christian legislation. (Great cheering.) I know well that it is not my part to dwell long upon topics with which others are better acquainted, but if you will allow me, I shall make a few observations with regard to the present state of agricultural industry in Scotland. We have of late years been much flattered by commendations of our system of farming in that country. Whenever any of the farmers of England were supposed not to be quite up to the mark, it used to be said by Sir Robert Peel and his friends, that those farmers had only to imitate the example of the men of the same class in the Lothians. But in the beginning of this year, after a fair trial had been given to the so-called experiment of free trade, the farmers of the Lothians came forward, and testified by the leading members of their body that they were losing under the present system, and that their industry, skill, energy, and frugality were employed in vain so long as that incubus weighed upon them. (Hear, hear.) What followed? Why, the note was immediately changed, and it was said that those men were not farming high enough! That discovery was made by a gentleman who now appears to be Sir Robert Peel's great authority upon the subject—a certain Mr Caird. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Now that gentleman, although a farmer, does not happen to be able to say that he ever made anything himself by farming. But he is acquainted with another individual, who is the factor on an estate of a very liberal landlord, who lets him have land for a merely nominal rent. That individual is at present in possession of a fine peat-moss, exceedingly well fitted for growing potatoes; and, as there has been less rot this year in his potatoes than in those of the greater portion of other farmers, he had derived from them a considerable profit. That is the farmer whose example is now recommended by Mr Caird as the grand panacea for all the evils under which the agricultural class is suffering. (Hear, hear.) So you see, gentlemen, in what you are to put your trust—peat-moss and potatoes! (Great laughter.) These are the twin resources with which you are to meet unlimited importations of grain! Pity, for the sake of Ireland, where both articles are abundant, that the discovery was made so late! I believe, indeed I know, you have something of the same sort here. Mr Mechi—(hear, hear, and laughter)—a gentleman whose razors are of undeniable excellence—has been attempting to show the farmers of England how to shave close (a laugh;) and the unclean spirit of free trade, finding no other place of refuge, has at last flown into the herd of Mr Huxtable's swine. (Immense cheering.) But I must say a few words with regard to the poorer districts—with regard to the Highlands of Scotland. The misery prevailing in many of those districts, more especially in the west and in the islands, did not proceed solely from the repeal of the corn laws; for it was also in a great measure owing to the noxious tariffs of Sir R. Peel, which admitted provisions duty-free into this country. It appears—indeed I believe it is an uncontradicted fact—that the British fleet is now victualled by foreign product. (Cries of "Shame.") I hold in my hand a letter from a banker in the town of Oban in Argyleshire, stating that emigration is now taking place to a very considerable extent there, that most of those who can scrape a few pounds together are taking their passage to America, and that shortly the landlords will be left with no class of people on their lands save the reckless, the improvident, and the idle. Free trade is now rapidly driving from the Highlands their most industrious inhabitants; and I believe that unless we compel the Government to retrace their steps, a large portion of Scotland will soon be brought back to the condition in which she was placed at the time when the Heritable Jurisdictions were repealed, and when the country was in a half savage state. (Hear.) I say that Scotland is now rapidly assuming the place which Ireland has hitherto occupied. A deluge of Irish labourers is already flowing over to us, and forcing down wages all over the country. I believe that, if this fatal experiment should be allowed to go on for another year, the cry from Scotland, and especially from her remoter districts, will become overpowering and appalling. We have seen the recent revelations made by the public press with regard to the state of the poor in this country. Everybody, I believe, has read in the graphic letters in the Morning Chronicle upon that subject, tales of the most appalling distress, flowing from excessive competition in every branch of industry. But that competition must necessarily be increased by that crowding into the towns from the country, which I know is now taking place in Scotland, of labourers who would emigrate if they had the means of doing so. I observe that it has been proposed, in a pamphlet recently published by an eccentric writer, that the surplus population of our towns should be marched out in industrial regiments, and sent to till the bogs and reclaim the hill sides. Such schemes are utterly visionary; and they are founded upon a shallow and perverted view of the social grievances against which we emphatically protest. Why, it is the want of occupation in the country just now which is doing the whole of the mischief, and which is creating that mass of pauperism which we all deplore. (Hear, hear.) It would seem, indeed, as if the present Ministers and the Free-traders would wish to realise no better picture of Great Britain than this—

The Free-traders tell us that they are at present as determined as ever on persisting in their experiment; but they talk incoherently about some future measure of relief, which, if we will consent to be quiet, they may possibly, out of their great bounty, vouchsafe to the victims of their policy. Now, let us see in what position we are placed. For the first time probably in the memory of man, the Whig Chancellor of the Exchequer has a surplus; but he does not well know what to do with it; and he thinks that perhaps the best way of employing a portion of it is to give the manufacturers another bonus by taking the duty off bricks; but he calls that a boon to the agriculturists. (Hear.) Why, in a single factory stalk there are more bricks than would build cottages for a whole parish! Let us see, however, how that surplus has been occasioned. That surplus would be a deficit, and a large deficit, were it not for the property and income tax laid on by Sir R. Peel—(hear, hear)—under a promise as solemn as ever flowed from the lips of man, that it was to be but temporary in its operation. But that tax has never been removed, and never will be removed, unless this country shall speak with more determination upon the subject than it has hitherto done. How does that tax work on you farmers? (Cheers.) You are charged to the income-tax in proportion to the amount of your rents, so that you do not pay it out of your profits. Now, I say that the continuance of that tax on the farmers, after the legislature has deprived them of the profits of their business, is a crying iniquity. (Hear, hear, and cries of "We will no longer pay it.") I suppose you will not pay it because you cannot pay it; that is, no doubt, the reason. But let us see what argument is advanced in favour of the continuance of Free Trade. What tangible ground have they for telling us that we are still bound to persevere? There is none; there cannot be any argument advanced in its favour. The experiment was adopted, we are told, with a view to stimulate exports, and to give the manufacturers of this country more extended markets for their produce. Well, but last year the amount of these exports had not reached the amount of the year 1845—the last year of Protection. (Immense cheering.) So then, even the exporting manufacturers have been disappointed. As to the home trade, we all know, and the manufacturers themselves know to their cost, in what a wretched position that is placed. But when the Free-traders were asked why they had adopted the Free-trade policy or why they continued it, they replied that it was because if they had not done so there would have been a revolution in this country. (Hear, and laughter.) That is, indeed, the most precious reason I have ever heard assigned for any course of policy. What does that say for the loyalty of the individuals for whom the change has been made? (Loud cries of "Hear, hear.") But you are known to be loyal, and you therefore the class selected to be sacrificed to buy up the loyalty of the towns. (Enormous cheering.) Test this argument of theirs in any way you will, and I defy you to arrive at any other conclusion. Is it not enough to make one sick to see such legislation going on? But it is not confined to Great Britain alone: we have it in Canada also at this moment. There the Government is buying up the rebels, compensating those who rose in arms against this country, and spreading disaffection among the loyal people of that colony, who were ready to lay down their lives in defence of the Queen and the Constitution. But I fear I have already detained you longer than I ought to have done. We are here simply to tell you, that in this great national struggle, for a principle which is scarce less vital to us than our liberties, our co-operation, according to the measure of our ability, shall be cordially and unreservedly given. (Loud cheering.) This is not England's battle only: it is ours as well; and therefore are we here to-day. It is matter for regret that the tenantry in Scotland have not oftener had opportunities of meeting their brethren in the south, and, indeed, that the agriculturists of the country generally cannot, from obvious reasons, be brought into contact with each other as frequently as would be desirable. But this I will say, that I believe the feelings among the yeomanry and the tenantry in both countries are the same; and that those two classes who, in days long gone by, met in hostile conflict, are now united in their determination to have the infamous measures which are over-riding us all repealed; and when the red cross of St George and the silver cross of St Andrew are blended indissolubly together, I fear no Cobdens—I fear no opposing force: I fear neither the machinations of the intriguer, nor the empty bluster of the demagogue. (Loud and long-continued cheers.) I despise their threats, as I know that their hearts are cowardly; and I tell them that their insolent challenge has been taken up, in a manner which they fear to answer, by the true men and the valiant spirits of Britain; and in the justice of the cause we repose our faith in its issue. (Loud and vociferous cheering.)

Sir M. RIDLEY WHITE, Bart., of Northumberland, seconded the resolution. He could undertake to say, from his personal knowledge, that, in the important county with which he was more intimately connected, the Free-trade policy had proved most seriously prejudicial to the agricultural classes. Earl Grey had declared that he did not consider the value of his property had been diminished by the adoption of that policy. But he (Sir M. Ridley White) could state one very striking fact, which, he thought, would show how groundless was that declaration. The noble Earl possessed, among other fine farms on his large estates, what might be called the picked farm of the county, as regarded the production of barley and turnips. That farm had been tenanted, a few years ago, by an intelligent and enterprising man, who had hitherto paid for it a rent of L.2240. The tenant had, some time since, announced that the circumstances of the times were such that he could no longer pay that rent, and that it should be reduced to L.1600. That proposal had not been agreed to by the noble Earl, and the farm had been advertised in all the local prints, as well as in other portions of England and in Scotland. One offer had been made for it, which, however, had subsequently been withdrawn, and the highest sum afterwards bid for it was a rent of L.1680. That offer had been refused by the noble Earl, and the result was that that farm, the pick, as it were, of the county, was at present occupied by the noble Earl himself. (Loud cries of "Hear, hear.") With such a fact staring the noble Earl in the face, he (Sir M. Ridley White) supposed he would not again get up in his place in the House of Lords and say that his property had not been depreciated by the adoption of the Free-trade system. But he should proceed to lay before the meeting a number of other facts, the truth of which he should at any time be ready to substantiate, for the purpose of showing how much the value of agricultural property had, of late, been diminished in the county of Northumberland. Many farms in that county had been recently relinquished in consequence of the depressed state of the markets for agricultural produce, and the rentals of those that had been re-let, had, in general, been reduced. A few instances to the contrary might be cited, but that variation could be satisfactorily accounted for. In the farm of Berwick Hill, the old rent had been L.500, the new rent was L.300. In Great Ryle, in the parish of Whittingham, the old rent had been L.1100, the new rent was L.855, being a decrease of 22 per cent. In Morwick, in the parish of Warkworth, the old rent had been L.715, the new rent was L.533, being a decrease of 22¹/₂ per cent. Prestwick East Farm, in the parish of Dinnington, within five miles Of the populous town of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, which had been recently let at L.300, was re-let this year at L.220, being a diminution of 26¹/₂ per cent. Then, again, he found that agricultural capital had been reduced very considerably, and in many cases rents were being paid out of the capital, and not from the returns of the farms. Reductions had been made in the wages paid to labourers to the amount of from 1s. to 2s. per week, and in the northern parts of the county to 2s. 6d. The sales of farm-stock had been unprecedented, both as to numbers, extent, and importance: the reduction in value at ready-money sales, as compared with former years, had been very considerable in every instance, varying from 20 to 40 per cent. Many labourers had been thrown out of employment, and the demand for able-bodied workmen was much reduced, while improvements in agriculture were not carried on to the same extent, or with the same spirit, as in former years. The demand for adventitious manures had also decreased, and that depression extended to the towns throughout the county, in which the tradesmen, whose prosperity was mainly dependent on that of the agriculturists, had suffered a depreciation to the amount of from 30 to 35 per cent. Having submitted those facts to the meeting, he had much pleasure in recommending the resolution for their adoption. (Cheers.)

The resolution was then put, and unanimously agreed to.

Mr J. J. ALLNATT, Wallingford, in Berkshire, proposed the following resolution:—"That no relief from general or local taxation, which is consistent with the maintenance of national faith, and the efficiency of public establishments, can enable the British and colonial producer to maintain a successful competition with foreign productions, and that the only hope of replacing the agricultural and other British interests in a state of prosperity rests on the re-establishment of a just system of import duties." He regretted to find that at that advanced hour he could trespass but a few minutes on their attention, because he had much to say of the atrocious position in which the agricultural classes had been placed by the legislation adopted of late years in this country. He felt convinced that unless that policy were speedily reversed, it would be impossible to continue to raise the amount of revenue necessary for the maintenance of those great establishments on which the national safety and honour mainly depended. He did not see why the farmers should be made the victims of an experiment which every one, except her Majesty's Ministers and the Free-traders, had foretold must bring ruin on the country. But what would be the nature and extent of that ruin? Were those institutions which constituted our pride and the world's envy to be toppled down merely that an "experiment" might be tried? Why, that experiment had already been tried, and, moreover, had most signally failed. He spoke as a Berkshire farmer, representing the feelings and opinions of the Berkshire farmers, and he might say of Oxfordshire too, for he lived upon the borders of the Thames, which separated the two counties; and he spoke advisedly and decidedly when he said that these insane laws had already produced great distress amongst the agricultural classes generally in these counties, and, he regretted to add, had also shaken those constitutional feelings and that attachment to the Crown which were once their boast. (Cheers.) Now, if he asked a brother farmer how he felt upon certain points of great importance connected with these matters, he would answer him thus—"I thought it was the duty of a government to uphold and protect every individual who is called on to pay taxes for the support of that government. I thought that we owed our fealty upon certain conditions, and that we had a right to demand protection, in the exercise of our skill and industry, against unfair competition." I am not enamoured of the word Protection, but I certainly thought we had a right to live and to say to any government—"You shall not, and you dare not, put your hand into my pocket and rob me." (Loud cheers.) Reference had been made to the statement of Mr Charles Villiers—that L.90,000,000 sterling had been saved to the country through the operation of Free Trade, and that therefore the country was the richer to that amount. He (Mr Allnatt) denied that proposition. He admitted that the agricultural interest had been robbed of L.90,000,000, but the country was not the richer for the transaction. (Hear, hear.) And if it were a fact that from a depreciation in the value of agricultural produce the country was gaining L.90,000,000 a-year, the agricultural interest had had taken from them to that extent their capability of paying the taxes of the country; and if so, truly did the resolution he was about to propose express one important fact, that the national faith was in danger. (Cheers.) Was it to be supposed that if they were still to be robbed of 90,000,000 a-year of their income, they would not look to the public funds and say, "It is impossible that we, the working bees, having been plundered of our honey, can continue to support the drones." This consideration was of great importance, and ought to sink deeply into the minds of those who, because they possessed fixed incomes, must of course feel a certain degree of temporary prosperity on account of the depreciation in the value of agricultural produce; but he warned those gentlemen not to put too much faith in that temporary prosperity. If the agricultural interest were to be thus treated—if they were to be thus robbed—for he could find no other expression that would accurately describe their treatment—he warned the fundholders that their time of trial and suffering would speedily arrive, and that shortly the term "national faith" would not be found in the vocabulary of the farmer. (Great cheering.) With regard to public establishments, he was as much disposed to support just and useful establishments as any man; but there were establishments in existence that were much too costly; and it was unjust that those persons who were connected with them should be in the receipt of the same amount of salary that was paid to them when wheat was 60s. a quarter. Therefore he told these officials—ay, the greatest of them—for he would go to the very pinnacle of power, and descend to the meanest of those who were paid by the State—"There ought to be some understanding as to how we are to pay you, and what amount we are to pay you in future." (Cheers.) But when he saw men like Mr Cobden and Mr Bright, professing the highest attachment to the principles of financial reform, and then reflected on their recent conduct in the House of Commons, when Mr Henley, the honest and patriotic member for Oxfordshire, brought forward his proposal embodying a proposition that was irrefutably true, and these men had the audacity, the hardihood, (a voice—"Impudence,")—ay, the impudence to meet that proposal by voting for the previous question, he (Mr Allnatt) was almost afraid to avow himself a financial reformer, lest he should be thought by honest men in some degree to partake of the inconsistency and hypocrisy of the leaders of the Free-trade faction. (An explosion of cheers.) The resolution concluded by the simple proposition that no relief which could be given by the remission of general taxation could save the agricultural interest from impending ruin. With respect to the House of Commons, he had formerly taken an active part in getting up petitions to that honourable house, but he had now done with that. (Loud cheers.) He should no more think of signing a petition to the House of Commons, under present circumstances, on behalf of the agricultural classes, than he should to the man in the moon. (Renewed cheers.) There was a time when he (Mr A.) was under the impression that the farmers of Great Britain and Ireland would, at all events, receive the sympathy, if not the assistance, of the majority of that branch of the Imperial Legislature at all times of difficulty and distress; That delusion had now vanished; and when he saw a majority of that House disbelieving the honest representations of those who were suffering the deepest distress, when he witnessed, in that majority, a disposition to evade the fair inference from facts which they dared not positively deny, and that they would do nothing voluntarily for the relief of that distress, which had been effected by their own erroneous legislation; then, he said, he considered it utterly useless either to trouble himself or disturb the calm repose of such an assembly as that, by stating to them his apprehensions of the impending ruin of British agriculture, and humbly soliciting their aid in averting so dire a calamity, which must ere long place in jeopardy even the most valued institutions of this great and powerful nation. (Cheers.) Did the farmers recollect what Mr S. Herbert had said about them—that they were coming before the House of Commons, ingloriously "whining for protection?" Now, I (continued Mr A.) do not mean to "whine." I mean to say, farmers of England! that you have no cause for whining—that you can, if you will, raise up your heads erect and demand the restoration of protection. (Vehement cheering.) I say it advisedly, that upon you, and upon the class which you represent, depends the great question, whether eventually the monarchy shall rest upon a rock, stable as those rocks which gird our shores, or whether a system shall be introduced breeding disaffection, alienating the attachment of the good and the loyal, and producing general confusion in the country. (Loud cheers.) I know, and I affirm fearlessly, that the continuance of the present system will ruin the landed interest of the country. We shall go first, but noble lords and the aristocracy of England will be the next to follow. It is impossible that the aristocracy of the country can be supported without the tenantry. We have lived long enough to find out that the expression of "rowing in the same boat" has been used figuratively, and has meant nothing. True, there are many exceptions, and noble lords and the gentlemen on the platform are amongst them. The allusion to "rowing in the same boat" is no longer generally applicable. We have rowed in the same boat, but they have too often pulled one way while we pulled another. (Cheers.) I want to see each one with a labouring oar in his hand. Let the landlords join the tenantry in pulling towards the desired haven, and I will be bound that the tenantry pull harder than they. (Loud cheers.) We come forward not only in defence of our own rights, but the rights of our landlords, and the rights of our labourers also. I am proud of the aristocracy of the country, and I believe their eyes will yet be opened, and that, when united with the tenant-farmer, they will not only re-establish his right to live and prosper on the soil of Old England, but preserve the Throne and prevent the establishment of a republican form of government in this country, which would be but the prelude to anarchy, bloodshed, and national disgrace. Mr Allnatt concluded by moving the resolution, amidst loud cheers.

Mr HUGH WATSON, Keillor, N.B., considered it a high compliment to the farmers of Scotland, that he, as representing that body, should be called upon to take a part in the business of this great meeting by seconding the resolution, so ably moved and introduced, for which purpose he now rose. He had come there as one of a deputation from the Protective Association of Scotland, and could answer for his brother farmers in the North, that in heart and soul they were with them. The farmers of Scotland had been accused, perhaps justly, of being a little slow in the Protection movement; but if they were so, it was not for lack of good will, but from motives of expediency or prudence. Although we had not made any great public demonstration in the North, we had, thanks to a valuable portion of the periodical press in Scotland, been enabled to express our feelings. To this influential organ of public opinion, which was not to be bought or sold, we owed a debt of deep gratitude, for it had stood by us in our adversity as well as in former prosperity. He was sorry that he was not able to tell that things were better in Scotland than they were in England. The tale that he might have related to them, was one of as great misery as any they had been called upon to listen to that day. At this late hour of the meeting, he would not go much into detail. The experiment now being made has nearly ruined the farmers of Scotland—a large portion of the arable land must go out of cultivation—and confiscation of property had this year extended to more than the gross rental of that kingdom. But, though the farmers felt they were grievously oppressed, they were not yet subdued. (Loud cheers.) There was a time when the interests of the landlords and tenantry of Scotland were regarded as inseparable; but, he was sorry to say, that feeling was not now so strongly entertained as formerly. Delusions and deceptions had been practised which had, in some cases, weaned the affections of the one class from the other; he could see, however, a growing disposition to return to the path in which they had formerly trod. He would say to his brother farmers of England, that some apology was due to them from the farmers of Scotland, for the unfounded aspersions which had been cast upon them by a few empirical pretenders, who, from their insignificance, only deserved their contempt. Let them be assured that the farmers of Scotland were not so ignorant of the modes of farming, the management of stock, and the general economy of well-managed English farms, or of the intelligence of English farmers, as to try and deceive them by any fine-spun theories of high-farming, or any such humbug. (Cheers and laughter.) They might depend upon it, that the parties who thus attempted to deceive them, or their landlords, were not those sterling farmers of Scotland we have been accustomed to look to during the last forty years. (Hear, hear.) One subject, which had been alluded to here and in other places, had roused his Scottish blood a little. The tenant farmers have been told that they have not the courage, moral or physical, to stand up, and insist upon their rights. Surely the fools who made such assertions as these do not know of what stuff the yeomanry of England are composed. (Loud cheers.) Surely they could never have seen such a sample of an Irishman as was then on his left hand—(the Marquis of Downshire); and I am quite sure they were equally ignorant of the character of the hardy sons of Scotland, who would spend the last drop of their blood rather than submit to insult. (Cheers.) In conclusion, this I will say, that if such men as this Apostle of Peace and his satellites choose to insult us, the men of England, Ireland, and Scotland, or dare us to the strife, then say I—

(Vociferous cheering.)

The resolution was carried unanimously.

WILLIAM CALDECOTT, Esq.—My Lords and Gentlemen, I rise not only as a landowner of one farm, and an occupier of another, but as a delegate from the neighbourhood of Colchester, deputed by my brother delegates to move the following resolution:—"That the members of the various delegations from all parts of the United Kingdom now present cannot separate without recording their deep sense of the invaluable services rendered to the cause of Protection by the noble President, the respected chairman of the acting committee, and the other members of the National Association, in whom the whole agricultural community repose the most deserved and unbounded confidence. And they earnestly recommend to their fellow-countrymen who desire the restoration of protection as the leading principle of legislative policy, to support the Association; and whatever differences of opinion may prevail on minor points, unitedly to follow its energetic but prudent guidance in the great struggle in which they are engaged." In my case, gentlemen, you see an instance of the distinction made between classes; for, when in private life as a merchant, my funded property escaped all contribution to tithes, poor-rates, and all other taxes; but no sooner was I induced, by the assurances of Sir Robert Peel, (the Judas Iscariot of political life,) that it would be madness to alter his corn-law, to invest it in land, than it became subject to an unequal and unjust share of public burdens, and which ought and must be inquired into, since faith has been broken with us; or how are we to keep faith with the national creditor when the means of doing so are taken from us? Knowing as I do from private friends, (Free-traders,) that the ulterior objects of the Free-traders are the destruction of the union between Church and State, the abolition of the Monarchy, and the establishment of a republic; and, lastly, the application of the sponge to the national debt, I tell Lord John Russell that, in aiding and abetting the Free-traders in these designs, instead of being a public reformer, he will prove himself a public destroyer, by alienating from her Majesty the most loyal and attached body in her kingdoms—the yeomanry of England. For the purpose of remedying the distress which was complained of, I would not (exclaimed Mr Caldecott) petition the House of Commons; but if we are to have no protection, let us go thousands in a body to insist upon equality of burdens. We have the power in our own hands. If they will not listen to the voice of reason—if constitutional means will not avail, band yourselves together in a league for withholding the taxes, the tithes, and the poor-rates, (immense cheering,) until the Government do listen to your complaints.

Mr WILLIAM RIGDEN, Hove, Sussex, seconded the resolution, and said at that late hour he would not detain the meeting, but merely make a single remark upon the report of the "Times' Commissioner" in reference to the county of Sussex. In the course of his travels the "Commissioner" seemed to have encountered a farm of 400 acres in the neighbourhood of Brighton, upon which he said the occupier had made a profit of £900 last year. He (Mr R.) undertook to say that that statement was not true, and he now publicly challenged the "Commissioner" to prove his assertion. (Loud cheers). As a proof of the distress prevailing in the county of Sussex, he might state, that within the last fortnight he had had more than fifty able-bodied labourers applying to him for work.

The resolution was put from the chair, and carried by acclamation.

Mr GEORGE BODINGTON, of Sutton Coldfield, said—I appear here to-day from the county of Warwick; and on behalf of the men of Warwickshire I say, that whatever may take place in this country as the consequence of the false policy of Free Trade, they will, under all circumstances, be ready to do their duty. It is, I think, a most surprising spectacle to see the yeomanry of England and Scotland assembled in the centre of this metropolis, for the purpose of carrying on an agitation in opposition to the measures of Government. We might almost appear to come forward in a new character upon this occasion, for we have been always ready to support the Monarchy, the Government, and the Constitution of this country. It might seem as if at present we were placed in a false position, but in reality we appear in the same position we have ever occupied, namely, as defenders of the institutions of the country. Free Trade is the policy of the Government, and it is a policy founded on the success of an agitation which was unconstitutional in its character and objects, and therefore we are here to-day to oppose it. The agitation which was carried on by the Anti-Corn-Law League, went to an extent, and had a purpose in view, far beyond the limits which the Constitution safely and fairly allows in the conduct and movement of measures by the people against the Government of the country. But how came the Constitution to fail on that occasion? For my part, I have faith in the British Constitution; and I do not believe that that great error would ever have been committed except through the treachery of those to whom its administration had been intrusted. Our cause has been lost by treachery and cowardice. (Cheers.) But how are we to rectify the error? I fear it can only be done by a dissolution of the present Parliament, and the election of another in its stead determined to vindicate the rights of native industry, and re-assert the authority and dignity of the Constitution from the violence and degradation to which it has been subjected. Are the present Ministers prepared to add to the dark catalogue of Free-trade disasters, (embracing the ruin of the West Indian colonies, the disaffection and threatened alienation of the Canadas, the entire ruin of Ireland, which, through Free Trade, special as well as general, is sunk to the lowest depths of misery and destitution,) the utter destruction of the capital in the hands of the tenant-farmers and yeomen of the country?—and with that, as a consequence, of the aristocracy?—and with that, of the throne? Why, these things must follow as the inevitable results of one another. It had been asserted by Sir R. Peel, on a recent occasion in the House of Commons, that the doctrine of Free Trade was analogous in principle to the law of gravitation which governs the great material world around us. He used this allusion, however, merely as a piece of empty declamation, without the smallest particle of reasonable argument to support his position. It is obvious that the law of gravitation operates as a restrictive, repulsive, and prohibitive power, as well as an attractive; or otherwise the planet we inhabit and the other spheres would quit their orbits, run in upon the sun the great centre, and produce chaos and universal ruin. (Loud cheers.) And thus, to compare great things with small, in the commercial world, Great Britain, the sun and centre, is producing confusion and general disorder by her abandonment of those great negative principles which are essential to the maintenance of natural distinctions and differences, and of the several inferior commercial centres, so to speak, in their respective orbits. And these results are exemplified in the destruction of the labour-interest of Ireland, involving, as we see it does, the destruction there of every other interest; in the deterioration of the labour-interest of England; in the outcast, from circulation, of a very large proportion of monetary capital from the commercial world; in the conflict of classes, now induced both abroad and now at length at home; and in a host of other social and political evils. And thus this analogous allusion, fairly argued, justifies the principle of Protection by restrictive laws, and utterly repudiates that of unguarded intercourse.

Free Trade will inevitably lead to the ruin of every great national interest, and it is therefore the duty of every one who wishes well to the British Empire, to assist in obtaining as speedily as possible a complete reversal of that policy. I will not detain the Meeting any longer, but at once read the resolution which has been intrusted to me, as follows:—"That a Memorial to the right hon. the First Lord of the Treasury be prepared, founded on the foregoing resolutions, protesting in the strongest manner against the continuance of the present system of miscalled 'Free trade,' and solemnly casting on the Administration, of which his Lordship is the head, the heavy responsibility of rejecting the appeals of the people for the abandonment of that system, and that a deputation be appointed for the purpose of presenting the same to his Lordship, and of representing to him the present critical and alarming position of many districts of this country, and of some of the most important colonies and dependencies of the British Crown."

Mr H. HIGGINS, of Herefordshire, came forward to second the resolution. He said that the county which he then represented suffered greater distress than had ever been known within the memory of the oldest inhabitant. He believed that if the present Free-trade policy were persisted in they would no longer have any of those fine exhibitions of cattle for which that county had hitherto been so famous. An hon. gentleman who preceded him had told them of the distress which at present prevailed in Ireland. But for his part, he believed that England was now being Ireland-ised as fast as possible. (Hear, hear.) And for whom had they (the tenant-farmers) been victimised? Who were reaping the harvest of their ruin? Why, the foreigner, the drone, and the millocrat. (Hear, hear.) It was not the industrious classes, as asserted by Mr Villiers, that had effected a saying of L.90,000,000 a-year by the repeal of the corn laws; for the greater portion of that sum went into the pocket of the foreigner. He told the Government that the industrious classes in this country would not stand that much longer. He warned the Government against driving these classes to desperation, and he told them that it was their firmness and loyalty which had at all times mainly contributed to keep the country in peace and quietness. But when a man lost his property he became reckless of consequences: for, in the scramble that might take place, he had everything to gain and nothing to lose. He would address one word to the landlords of England. He would tell them that they had not done their duty. (Hear, hear.) But he would further tell them, not to be misled by the delusion that they could derive from extra production a compensation for the depreciation of prices. He would call on the Legislature of this country to redress the wrongs of the agricultural classes, unless they intended to excite those classes to exercise the strength which they still retained in their hands. If they could not obtain justice by rational means—if they could not succeed by moral force—he for one was prepared to do anything in defence of his own. (Hear, hear.)

The Right Hon. the Earl of EGLINTON then came forward, amidst loud cheers, to move the following resolutions:—"That the cordial thanks of this meeting be respectfully offered to his Grace the Duke of Richmond, K.G., for his manly and consistent maintenance of the cause of Protection on all occasions, and especially for the able and impartial manner in which he has presided over the proceedings of this day." The noble earl said, that meeting had been characterised by more unanimity than any meeting, perhaps, at which he had ever assisted; but he felt certain that whatever might be the unanimity, and whatever might be the enthusiasm with which they had received the preceding resolutions, the one which he had then to propose would be received with still more unanimity, and with still greater enthusiasm. He had to propose the thanks of the meeting to their noble chairman. (Loud and long continued cheers.) Many censures had that day been unsparingly, but he should confess most justly, showered down upon that class to which he belonged. He was, however, proud to say, that he, in common with hundreds of others, had escaped from that censure. He was also proud to say that the class to which he more especially belonged—he meant the peerage of Scotland—had been particularly exempt from that vacillation and apathy which had distinguished too many of the nobility of the empire. (Hear, hear.) When he told them that out of 16 representative peers who sat in the House of Lords for Scotland, on the great division which took place with respect to the repeal of the corn laws, 10 had voted against the measure, 2 had not voted at all, one of whom was now as stanch a Protectionist as any present, and only 4 had recorded their votes against the principle of Protection—one of these being thousands of miles off, and perhaps incapable of forming any decision of his own upon the subject—when he told them those facts, he thought they would admit that the peerage of Scotland had not as a body been deficient in their duty upon that occasion. One of the most eloquent speakers who had addressed them that day, Professor Aytoun, had told them of some bad articles which came from Scotland in the shape of political economists. But he (the Earl of Eglinton) could not refrain from saying one word in favour of "Auld Scotland" upon that occasion, and he would ask them whether they had not seen one good article come from that country in the shape of the Professor himself? (Cheers.) It might not be so well known to the body of the meeting as it was to him, how deeply the Protectionist cause was indebted to that gentleman (hear); but he knew that the most powerful, the most eloquent, and the most convincing statements in favour of Protection had come from his pen. (Cheers.) He should also call to their recollection the honest specimen of a Scotch tenant-farmer—namely, Mr Watson, whom they had heard that day, and of whom he confessed he, as a countryman, felt proud, (hear, hear;) but, above all, he begged to state, that Scotland owned one-half of their noble chairman. The noble duke was one-half a Scotchman by birth, by property, and by feeling. (Hear, hear.) He knew that that was not a time of the day to go on descanting on all that they owed to the noble duke, and still more did he know that the presence of the noble duke did not afford the fitting opportunity for adopting such a course. He should say, however, that he well knew that there was not in that room, or in the country, a sincere well-wisher to the British empire, who did not look upon the noble duke as one of the most straightforward, one of the most gallant, and one of the most useful men whom this country ever possessed. (Cheers.) He should not detain them longer; but would content himself with leaving the resolution in their hands. (Great cheering.)

Lord JOHN MANNERS, M.P., came forward, amidst very loud and general cheering, to second the resolution. The noble lord said that in terminating the proceedings of that most remarkable meeting—remarkable not only for the ability of the speeches which they had heard, and the unanimity that had characterised their proceedings, but also for the presence of so many delegates, representing, and representing so truly, every suffering interest in this great community—he felt that he had a task at once most difficult and most gratifying to perform. Most truly had Lord Eglinton said that in the presence of the noble duke a certain reserve was necessary in speaking of those qualities which commanded their admiration; but still they should not be doing justice to their feelings if they permitted that opportunity to pass without saying that they did not know in the whole peerage one man who more justly commanded the respect, the admiration, and the affection of the industrious classes of this country. (Cheers.) Lord Eglinton had said some thing in favour of that house to which the noble duke belonged; and he (Lord J. Manners) hoped he might be allowed for one moment to say something in favour of that house to which he had so recently been returned. He could not, like some of the gentlemen who had that day addressed them, despair even of the present graceless House of Commons. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) If they asked him his reason, he should tell them that he found one in the fact, that, when that House of Commons had first met, the majority then against those principles which that meeting had assembled to enforce, and which they intended to carry into successful operation, amounted to not less than 100; while at the present moment that majority could not, he believed, be estimated at more than a score of votes. Another reason why he did not despair of the present House of Commons was derived from the recent election of the hon. and gallant colonel the member for Cork, who was then assisting at their proceedings. (Hear, hear.) He had no doubt but that at future elections they would continue further to increase the number of members ready to advocate and support their cause. If he might be permitted to give one word of advice, he would suggest that, while they took every precaution for returning, for the future, members who were prepared to vindicate the great principle of protection to native industry, they ought not to discourage, but to aid, those members in the present House of Commons who zealously sought to put down that system which they believed in their consciences to be working the destruction of this mighty empire. (Hear.) He should further say, that he found a fresh justification for a return of their somewhat waning confidence in the House of Lords, in the presence among them that day of the noble duke to whom they were going to offer by acclamation the vote of their unbounded confidence and admiration. (Cheers.) When they saw the noble duke supporting the dignity of the peerage with so much gallantry, so much honesty, and such unswerving onwardness of purpose, they might, he thought, well take courage; and believe that both Houses of Parliament would yet faithfully represent, and faithfully carry out, the principles on which the Constitution of this country had so long depended, and on which it must continue to depend if it was still to remain the Constitution of the greatest empire of the known world. (Hear, hear.) He called on them to vote by acclamation the resolution which he had the honour to second. He called upon them to rise as one man and give three lusty cheers for their noble chairman the Duke of Richmond. (The call was responded to with enthusiasm, the whole meeting rising as one man.)

The NOBLE DUKE proceeded to acknowledge the compliment as follows:—I rise, as you may well conceive that I must, impressed with a deep feeling of gratitude to you, the delegates from nearly every county in England and Scotland, for the very kind and flattering manner in which you have been pleased to pass the present resolution. I claim no merit for myself for what I have done in Parliament and out of Parliament, with the view of preventing the adoption of the Free-trade policy, or with a view of regaining protection to native industry. I claim no merit to myself for the course I have pursued, because I think that course is absolutely necessary, not only for the welfare and the prosperity of the landed interest of the country, but for the welfare of all classes of our fellow-subjects. (Hear, hear.) I never advocated protection to the farmer without also advocating protection to the silk weaver and to the manufacturer. (Hear, hear.) I am called on in Parliament not to legislate for one class, but to legislate for all classes, and I therefore have not pledged myself to the maintenance of the principle of protection without an earnest inquiry into the whole subject. I have, however, thought it my duty to give a pledge, and, with God's help, I will never violate it. (Cheers.) I am not made of that stuff which would permit me to veer about like the wind, and to flatter every popular demagogue. (Hear, hear.) I have one English quality in me, which is, that I will not be bullied into any course of which my judgment disapproves. (Hear, hear.) I will not allow a knot of Manchester Free-traders to dictate to the good sense of the community at large. (Hear, hear.) I will not consent to lose the colonies of this great empire. (Hear, hear.) I will not help to carry out a system which is bringing ruin to our shipping interest, (cheers,) and which forces to emigration those honest and industrious mechanics, who, by their skill, their energy, and their good conduct, have, up to the time of the repeal of the Navigation Laws, been able to get a fair day's wages for a fair day's work. (Cheers.) Neither will I consent to have the honour and glory of this great country dependent upon Mr Cobden and his party. (Cheers.) I am for English ships, manned by English hearts of oak. (Renewed cheers.) I am for protecting domestic industry in all its branches. (Hear, hear.) I feel, however, that at this time of the evening I ought not to trespass at any length on your attention; but cordially agreeing with all the resolutions that have been put here to-day, and carried unanimously, and agreeing with much that has fallen from the different eloquent gentlemen who have addressed you, I must speak out my own mind; and I hope that you, the farmers of England, will not respect me the less for doing so. (Hear.) Well, then, I must say that I only recommend constitutional means, (hear, hear,) and I certainly do not recommend the adoption of any threats of violence or force, and still less do I recommend that we should band ourselves together not to pay taxes, (Hear, hear.) We are the representatives of a truly loyal people. By constitutional means we shall gain a victory of which we shall afterwards have reason to be proud; but if we descend to the miserable and degrading tricks of the Anti-Corn Law League, (hear, hear,) we cannot be respected, because we cannot respect ourselves. I thank you for the confidence you have shown towards me. I thank you, in my own name, and in the name of many Protectionists who have not been able to be present here to-day, for the unanimous manner in which you have carried the resolutions, and the patience with which you have listened to him who is now addressing you, who is so little worthy of attention. But as long as I shall continue to have health, I shall take every opportunity of meeting the tenant-farmers of this country, (hear, hear,) notwithstanding that I may be told in the House of Lords, in a majority of whose members I have no confidence, (hear, hear,) that by presiding at meetings of this description I am creating a panic among the tenantry. That, gentlemen, is the last attack that has been made on me and on my noble friends around me. I was told the other night, in the House of Lords, by a noble lord who is a disciple of Sir R. Peel, that it was to myself and to those who pursued a similar course to mine that the lowness in the price of corn is to be attributed. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) His assertion was, "That the speeches delivered in this country found their way into the German newspapers, and that the German farmers, believing that shortly a duty on the import of foreign corn would be imposed, sent over their corn to this country and sold it here at a loss." In reply I stated that, if this statement was correct, I could not regret that I had contributed to the foreigners losing money, if they choose to send their corn here. I have no bad feeling to the foreigner; but I may say that, if we are exposed to taxes from which he is exempt, I could feel no pity for any loss that he might sustain in his competition with the agriculturists of this country. (Cheers.) One word on the subject of the income tax, which is now so oppressive to the tenant-farmer. When I stated in the House of Lords, a few evenings ago, that the farmers had no right to be called upon to pay that tax whilst they derived no profit from their holdings, Lord Grey said that he admitted the hardness of the case, but that he and his party had not originally enacted the law, but that it emanated from Sir R. Peel. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) To that I felt it my duty to say, that although they did not originally enact the law, they had extended the time of its operation. (Hear, hear.) At the same time, I certainly did not attempt to justify Sir R. Peel; for I would be the last man to undertake such a task. (Hear, hear.) I again thank you for the confidence you have shown towards me; and if my services can ever be of the slightest use to the tenantry of this country, or to its domestic industry, I can only say that those services, such as they are, will ever be at your disposal. (The noble Duke concluded amidst enthusiastic cheering.)

The meeting immediately separated, Mr G. F. Young informing the delegates that the National Association was anxious for their presence at their rooms, at the South Sea House, on the following morning, at eleven o'clock.

PRESENTATION OF THE MEMORIAL TO LORD JOHN RUSSELL.

The delegates re-assembled in considerable numbers at the South Sea House on Saturday morning, when they agreed to the following address to the Prime Minister, which had been prepared, in conformity with the resolutions passed at the great aggregate meeting at the Crown and Anchor on Tuesday last:—

"TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD JOHN RUSSELL, M.P., FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY, &c.

"May it please your Lordship,—We are deputed to address you in the name and at the desire of a public meeting held in this metropolis on the 7th inst., which, consisting of a considerable number of members of both Houses of Parliament, merchants, shipowners, tradesmen, and others connected with the most important interests of the nation, and comprising nearly 500 owners and occupiers of land, specially delegated by the agriculturists of every part of the United Kingdom, to represent the present condition of their respective localities, and to express their opinion on the public policy of your lordship's administration, presents a just claim to the serious attention of her Majesty's Government.

"On the authority of this meeting, unanimously expressed, it is our duty to declare to your lordship that intolerable distress now almost universally pervades the British agricultural interest; that many branches of the colonial interest are fast sinking into ruin; that the shipping and other great interests of the country are involved in difficulty and deep depression; and that large masses of the industrial population are reduced to a state of lamentable deprivation and suffering.

"It must be obvious that such a condition of affairs is fraught with consequences disastrous to the public welfare; and if not speedily remedied, it is the conviction of the meeting that it will endanger the public peace, prove fatal to the maintenance of public credit, and may even place in peril the safety of the State.

"It is our duty further to declare to your lordship that the dangerous evils we have thus described are, in the deliberate judgment of the meeting, attributable to the recent changes made in those protective laws by which the importation of articles of foreign production had long been regulated, which changes it regards as most rash and impolitic. It considers the ancient system of commercial law to have been based on the most just principles, and dictated by the soundest views of national policy. It cannot forget that, under that system, Great Britain attained an unexampled state of prosperity and a proud pre-eminence in the scale of nations; and it is its firm conviction that if the principle of fostering and protecting British industry and British capital be abandoned, many of the most important interests of the State will be utterly and cruelly sacrificed, and the national prosperity and greatness be ruinously impaired.

"The meeting is further of opinion that no relief from general or local taxation, which would be consistent with the maintenance of public faith and the efficiency of public establishments, could enable the British and colonial producer successfully to compete with foreign productions; and that the only hope of replacing the agricultural and other native and colonial interests in a state of prosperity rests on the re-establishment of a just system of import duties.

"The meeting deeply deplores that the distressing and destructive consequences of the system of miscalled Free Trade having been repeatedly and urgently pressed on the attention of Parliament, the House of Commons has treated the just complaints of the people with indifference, has exhibited a total want of sympathy for their sufferings, and has refused to adopt any measures for removing or alleviating the prevalent difficulty and distress.

"This conduct has naturally produced a widely-diffused feeling of disappointment, discontent, and distrust, which is rapidly undermining the reliance of the people in the justice and wisdom of Parliament, the best security for loyalty to the Throne, and for the maintenance of the invaluable institutions of the country.

"Having thus faithfully represented to your lordship the general views on the policy of the country, expressed in the recorded resolutions of the meeting we represent, we proceed to discharge the further duty intrusted to us of addressing your lordship as the head of that Administration by which the policy so strongly deprecated is continued and defended.

"We are charged earnestly to remonstrate and protest on the part of the deeply injured thousands whose property has been torn from them by the unjust and suicidal impolicy of which we complain; and still more emphatically on behalf of the millions of the industrial population dependent on them for employment, and consequently for subsistence, against the longer continuance of a system which, under the specious name of Free Trade, violates every principle of real freedom, since it dooms the taxed, fettered, and disqualified native producer to unrestricted competition in his own market with the comparatively unburdened foreigner. We not only deny the moral right of any government or of any legislature to have involved in certain loss and suffering large masses of a flourishing community, for the sake of giving trial to a mere experiment; but we assert that the experiment has been tried, and has signally and disastrously failed, and we demand therefore, as the right of those we represent, the prompt restoration of that protection from unrestricted foreign import which can alone rescue them from impending destruction.

"It is painful for us to declare, but it is our duty not to disguise, that the pertinacious adherence of the Cabinet, of which your lordship is at the head, to the policy of miscalled Free Trade, and its determined rejection of the appeals of the people for a reversal of that policy, have extended to the executive government of the country the same feelings of distrust and discontent which are widely diffused with respect to the representative branch of the Legislature. We solemnly adjure your lordship to remember that discontent unattended to may ripen into disaffection.

"We know that the loyalty of the people to their most gracious Sovereign, under all their grievances and wrongs, remains, and will remain, unshaken; but we are aware, and it is our duty, therefore, to warn her Majesty's Government, that the state of feeling in many districts of the country is most critical and alarming, hazardous to its peace, perilous to the maintenance of public credit, and dangerous to its established institutions; nor must we be deterred, either by our unqualified respect for your lordship's personal character, or by the just consideration we owe to the elevated position you occupy, from casting on your lordship and your colleagues the awful responsibility of all the consequences that may result from a continuance of your refusal either to redress the wrongs of the people, or to allow them the constitutional opportunity for the vindication of their rights, by dissolving the Parliament and appealing to the voice of the country.

"London, May 11, 1850."

(Signed)
George Frederick Young, Chairman of Acting Committee,			}
F. Cayley Worsely, Vice Chairman,			}
James Blyth, Vice Chairman,			}
Augustus Bosanquet, Chairman of Colonial Committee,			}	Of the National
Richard Davis,	}		}	Association.
Benjamin B. Greene,	}	Members of Ditto,	}
David Charles Guthrie,	}		}

Charles Beke, Secretary.
W. Tindall.	Thomas Hartshorne, South Staffordshire.
H. C. Chapman, Liverpool.	Thomas Jesty, Dorsetshire.
Wm. Layton, Cambridgeshire.	G. P. Dawson, Yorkshire, West Riding.
Nathaniel Barthropp, Suffolk.	W. T. Lockyer, North Stafford.
Edward Tull, Berkshire.	Samuel Lovell, Oxfordshire.
James Linton, Huntingdonshire.	Douglas Lynes, West Norfolk.
Paul Foskett, East Surrey.	E. Cayley, jun., East Yorkshire.
John King, Somerset.	R. Hewett, Northamptonshire.
John Elliot, South Devon.	William Gray, Northamptonshire.
Robert Baker, Essex.	Philip Box, Buckinghamshire.
Joseph Pain, Bedfordshire.	S. Musgrave Hilton, East Kent.
Samuel Cheetham, Rutland.	Charles Lillingston, Ross-shire.
Thomas Vowe, Leicestershire.	Edward Trood, Devonshire.
John Simpson, Suffolk.	Edward Trood, Devonshire.
Frederick King, Wilts.	Richard Franklen, Glamorganshire.
Richard Strange, Wiltshire.	Thomas Bold, Liverpool.
John Walker, Nottinghamshire.	J. Parsons Cook, Leicestershire, South.
George Storer, Nottinghamshire.	John Wood, East Somersetshire.
William Skelton, Lincolnshire.	Charles Harland, North Riding of Yorkshire.
J. H. Walker, Warwickshire.	M. White Ridley, Northumberland.
John Ellman, Sussex.	Richard Belton, South Shropshire.
Rowland Goldhawk, West Surrey.	John Hall, Bart., East Lothian.
William Mallins, South Derbyshire.	R. Scot Skirving, Haddingtonshire.
Charles Day, clerk, South Essex.	H. St. V. Rose, Ross-shire.
W. E. Russell, West Kent.	James A. Cheyne, Argyllshire.
Reynolds Peyton, Herefordshire.	George Burtt, North Hampshire.
Math. Henry Bigg, West Sussex.
Daniel Baker, Monmouthshire.
E. J. Perkins, North Warwick.

Shortly after twelve o'clock the deputation proceeded to the Premier's official residence in Downing Street. It consisted of the several gentlemen whose names were appended to the address, and was accompanied by Mr Newdegate, M.P., Colonel Sibthorp, M.P., Mr Bickerton, (Shropshire,) Sir J. F. Walker Drummond, Bart., (Midlothian,) Mr Hugh Watson, (Keillor,) Forfarshire; Mr John Dudgeon, (Spylaw,) Roxburghshire, &c.

On the deputation being ushered into the reception-room, Lord John Russell welcomed the gentlemen composing it with characteristic courtesy, and cordially shook Mr Young by the hand, at the same time expressing his regret that the Duke of Richmond was unable to attend.

Mr Young.—I was about to explain to your lordship that his Grace is unable to attend from indisposition, and that I this morning received a letter from his Grace, which I will read to your lordship:—

"Goodwood, May 10, 1850."

"My Dear Sir,—I write to ask you to make my excuses to the deputation if I do not make my appearance to-morrow at a quarter past twelve in Downing Street. I have not been able to leave my room to-day from a violent cold and rheumatism, and if not better, shall not be able to go to London for some days.

"Believe me, my dear sir, yours sincerely,
"G. F. Young, Esq.(Signed) "Richmond."

Mr Young continued—I feel deep regret that his Grace is unable to attend here to-day; but I beg to assure your lordship that we have his Grace's concurrence in all our proceedings, and I am about to place in your lordship's hands a document which has been drawn up under his full sanction, and to which his Grace's signature would have been affixed if his absence from indisposition had not prevented it, and we had not been ignorant of that fact until it was too late to transmit it to him for signature. Your Lordship is, no doubt, aware that a large public meeting took place in this metropolis on Tuesday last, at which certain resolutions were adopted relative to protection to native industry; and amongst them one appointing a deputation to wait upon your lordship with a memorial, and to furnish you with such explanations as you may require. With your lordship's permission, I will now proceed to read the address with which I have the honour to be intrusted. Mr Young here read the address, and continued thus:—I do not know, my lord, that it becomes me to make any comments upon this document, which has been prepared with the unanimous assent of the gentlemen whom I have here with me to-day, except to refer you generally to the opinions which it contains, and on their behalf to tender any explanation which your lordship may deem requisite in reference to the assertions therein made, or to any point connected with the subject which is now brought under your lordship's notice with very great pain on the part of those for whom I have the honour to speak.

Lord J. Russell.—I may be allowed to say—and I do not do so without due consideration—that, of course, I am ready at all times to take upon myself all the responsibility which belongs to the executive government; but with regard to the assertions in this address respecting the House of Commons, you state—"That the meeting is further of opinion that no relief from general or local taxation which would be consistent with the maintenance of public faith, and the efficiency of public establishments, could enable the British and colonial producer successfully to compete with foreign productions." Now, that proposal for relief from general and local taxation, consistent with the maintenance of public faith and the efficiency of public establishments, is, in fact, the only proposition of a large nature that has been rejected by the House of Commons. You also say here, "that the only hope of replacing the agricultural and other native and colonial interests in a state of prosperity, rests on the re-establishment of a just system of import duties." I do not deny, or wish in any way to shrink from the responsibility which rests upon her Majesty's government for the line of policy they have adopted; but no such proposition has been made to the House of Commons, and the House of Commons has not rejected any such proposition.

Mr Young.—It is intended to express the deep disappointment we felt that no such proposition has been made, whether as emanating from the Government, or from any party in the House of Commons.

Mr Newdegate.—Your lordship will permit me to remind you, that although no direct motion has been made in the House of Commons for the immediate restoration of Protection, that great question has been admitted to have been involved in the course of discussions that have arisen upon other questions.

Lord J. Russell.—That is true; but whilst some persons have said it would be beneficial, there are others who say that it would be injurious.

Mr Young.—I wish to impress upon your lordship's mind that I, and those with whom I am associated, do not attach much importance to those discussions in the House of Commons, because we are perfectly well aware that, if such a proposition were made, it would certainly be rejected. We attach no importance to them. We think that the House of Commons, as at present constituted, does not truly represent the feelings and opinions of the majority of the people of this country, and we should be glad to have the opportunity of seeing whether it does or not.

Mr John H. Walker (of Leamington.)—I am here as the representative of South Warwickshire, to express to your lordship my conviction that a great change has taken place in the opinions of the people with regard to free trade. I am in the habit of travelling a great deal, and I never enter a railway carriage or go into company that I do not find those who were formerly regular Free-traders, and have now become quite the reverse. They object to the operation of free trade, that the foreigner gets all the benefits which we are losing.

Mr Young.—It does not become us now to attempt to enter upon the discussion of so wide a question as that. I feel that we should not be able to do so with advantage, or be justified in intruding upon your time for that purpose. There is, however, one part of the proceedings at the recent meeting, a report of which your lordship has no doubt seen, upon which I wish to make a few observations. You will there have seen that some rather strong expressions were used. Without at all wishing to apologise for those expressions, or giving an opinion as to their propriety or impropriety, I will take the liberty of expressing our hope that, whatever opinion your lordship may have formed of those expressions, you will not take them as speaking the general sentiments of the meeting—which ought alone to be held responsible for the opinions expressed in their recorded resolutions. I allude to this simply as a matter of explanation, for I should be sorry if your lordship were led to depart from the general principle laid down, of only recognising the acts of the meeting, without judging of its character by merely isolated expressions falling from individual speakers.

Lord John Russell.—I can assure you, Mr Young, that I should not have adverted to that circumstance, as I am quite aware that in public meetings, where a number of persons are desirous of giving expression to their opinions, great latitude of speech must be allowed. With regard to the expressions alluded to, though I may think them rather stronger than necessary, I observed in the report of the proceedings that the Duke of Richmond, in his reply, went as far in censure of them as I should be disposed to do; and having every confidence in the Duke of Richmond's loyalty, his wish to support the law, and his discretion, I think what he said upon the subject was amply sufficient.

Mr Young.—I will only add that many of us are magistrates ourselves, and that we are fully conscious of the duty which devolves upon us to do all we can for the maintenance of the public peace. What was said, I believe, was only intended to show the facts of our position to the House of Commons, from whom we claim protection, as an act of justice.

Lord John Russell.—Mr Newdegate, do you wish to say anything further?

Mr Newdegate.—I wish merely to express my concurrence in the objects of the deputation, and that I consider it fortunate that your lordship has permitted the deputation this opportunity of bringing before your notice the reality and extent of the distress which prevails in many districts, the severity of its pressure, and the danger from the feelings of discontent which has unhappily but indubitably grown up under the severe depression to which a large portion of the community is now exposed.

Lord John Russell, (addressing Mr Young.)—You have very truly stated that it would be quite useless to enter into a discussion here upon, not only one large question, but the several large questions, which are involved in this memorial, and which refer to our commercial laws, the state of agriculture and shipping, and the condition of the country at large. These various subjects would lead to a most extended discussion, if once we were to enter upon it. All I can say, therefore, is, that I take upon myself the whole responsibility of any advice which I may consider it my duty to give to my Sovereign. Certainly my experience leads me, I confess it, to a directly opposite conclusion with respect to the main point contained in this memorial—I think it would neither be desirable to go back from free trade to prohibition or restriction; nor advisable to dissolve Parliament in order to ask the opinion of the country upon the subject. That is the conclusion to which I have come. With respect to the suffering which has been stated to exist, it is neither inconsistent with my expectations, nor inconsistent with what I have heard, that in various parts of the country deep suffering does exist, and that that suffering is partly—and I should say in part only—owing to recent changes in our commercial laws. I believe that these changes were, in their general aspect, inevitable. I believe that ten years ago it might have been foreseen that this country, as it became more opulent and commercial, would require great changes in that direction, and my object was at that time to make the transition accompanied by as little suffering and distress as possible. But the advice I gave with that view was rejected, not only with contempt, but with indignation. Other changes have taken place since then, and the changes which have now taken place have been certainly of a much more decisive character than those which I originally proposed. I am sorry to say that I think the conduct of the agricultural, the colonial, and other interests, was not prudent in declaring that there should be no change in 1841. Still that was their decision, and in 1846 a much greater change was effected in those laws. In 1847 a general election took place, by which the electors had to decide upon the conduct of those who had taken part in the adoption of these changes, and the result was the election of the present parliament, which has decided upon continuing the policy which the House of Commons had laid down in 1846. I own I do think it was very unwise—if I may be allowed to say so—in 1841, not to have sought some compromise; but I think it would be far more unwise now to seek to restore a system of protective duties. I believe that that, so far from leading to a settlement of this great question, would lead to fresh agitation, and a renewal of the present law—the law repealing those protective duties. I would put it to any man who is engaged in industrial pursuits of any kind, however he may think it would be advisable to restore the ancient system of protection, whether it would be wise or advantageous to have those laws re-enacted in 1851, again to be repealed in 1852 or 1853? I own I must think that to all interests concerned, especially to the agricultural interest, those changes and those renewals would be the very worst measures that could be adopted. All return to the former system being, as I believe, impossible, it may be desirable to equalise, if possible, the charges upon land, which I believe to be the wish of all parties. The changes which have been made, I believe to be, in their general aspect, agreeable to the progress of society in this country, and that the endeavour of all interests should henceforth be to adapt themselves to those changes rather than attempt their reversal. I may be mistaken in these views, but in the position I occupy, whether as a minister of the Crown or as a member of parliament, I feel that I cannot do otherwise than act upon convictions which I so strongly entertain; and if I held your opinions I should act as you do.

Mr Young.—Perhaps you will not deem me unreasonable if I advert to one or two remarks which have just fallen from your lordship. In the first place, your lordship says it will not be wise again to return to a system of protection and restriction. I can speak especially for the interest to which I belong—and being almost altogether unconnected with the landed interest, I could have wished some of the gentlemen whom I see around me stood in the position in which I have been unexpectedly placed; but I can speak especially for the shipping interest, and I believe I may also for the agricultural interest, when I say that they do not seek, that they do not desire, a system of prohibition. If you refer to the expressions which are contained in that memorial, you will find that all they ask is a just and equitable system of import duties. We do not presume to dictate the degree which would constitute justice; but we believe that, if the principle were once acknowledged, there would be no difficulty in placing the details upon such a basis as to give satisfaction to all parties. The next point upon which I would venture to offer one word by way of explanation, and as the expression of that which I know to be the universal sentiment of this deputation, is, that although, after the enactment of the changes of 1846, namely, in 1847, a general election did take place, yet your lordship will recollect that which is imprinted upon the mind of the country at large, that that election took place under circumstances which had shattered to pieces all parties in the state, and had placed the constituencies in such a position that, as we think, the election of 1847 was not a fair exponent of the sentiments and opinions which were entertained by the people at large.

Mr Guthrie.—Your lordship has expressed it as your opinion that it was unwise to reject the proposition which you made in 1841, for imposing a fixed duty of 8s. per quarter on wheat. Now, supposing your lordship acted wisely in proposing that measure, and the other party unwisely in rejecting it, if the other party should come round to your lordship's former opinion upon that subject, allow me to ask if you think it would be wrong, in 1850, to revert to the proposal which you deemed to be so perfectly right in 1841.

Lord J. Russell.—I can easily answer that question. Without going into other considerations, supposing the price of corn to be at that time 58s., a law that would reduce the average to 50s. would be well taken; whereas, if the price were 42s., the law which would raise it from 42s. to 50s. would be ill taken.

Mr Young.—Allow me, on behalf of the deputation, to thank your lordship for the attention with which you have heard us, and to express a hope that, should any of the observations in the address which I have had the honour to place in your lordship's hands appear too strong, you will not consider it as any mark of disrespect to yourself, but merely as an indication of the feelings which we entertain on the subject. I can now only apologise for having detained your lordship so long, but trust the important nature of the interests we represent will be a sufficient excuse.

Mr Guthrie.—Are you not going to say anything relative to the colonial interests?

Mr Young.—I left that in your hands. I thought you were going to speak upon that subject rather than upon agriculture.

Mr Guthrie.—Then, perhaps, your lordship will excuse me for again occupying your attention for a few moments relative to the interests of the colonies. I had the honour to wait upon you once before on the same subject, and can assure you that the difficulties under which the colonies laboured last year are in no degree diminished. Indeed, since that time the creditors have become the possessors of the estates, and the proprietors are now between sinking and swimming. Whether or not they shall he ruined will depend upon whether the differential duties shall be continued or not. I consider that the colonists have a right to demand that some protection should be given to them, seeing the difficulties that have been thrown in their way in obtaining labour. Those duties are to be again reduced in July next, and go off entirely in the following July; but I consider that some measure ought to be introduced to put the produce of the colonies on an equal footing with the produce of slave countries. Immense sums have been spent by this country to put a stop to the slave trade, while every encouragement is given to the produce of slave-holding countries. The tendency of all the legislation of late years has been to raise the value of foreign produce, and depress the property of the colonies. I am sure that I need not inform your lordship that a deep sympathy is felt throughout the country for the sufferings of the colonists, and I hope that your lordship will give the subject your early consideration and attention, as the distress existing among the various interests of the country bound us as in a common bond to endeavour to revise and amend our present position.

The audience then terminated, and the deputation withdrew to the large room at the King's Arms, Palace Yard, where several delegates delivered spirit-stirring addresses, which contained earnest exhortations to each other, and to their friends in the country, to combine and manfully to fight the battle of protection for England's best interests; and a determination was expressed to act, in their respective localities, upon the advice of the committee of the National Association, to "Register, register, register."

THE DELEGATES' ADDRESS TO LORD STANLEY, AND HIS LORDSHIP'S REPLY.

Lord Stanley having complied with the request which had been made to him, founded upon a resolution agreed to at the meeting at the South Sea House, on Thursday last, to receive an address from the delegates, on the termination of the above proceedings, a large body of gentlemen, headed by Mr William Layton, the chairman of the Isle of Ely Protectionist Society, proceeded to Lord Eglinton's mansion in St James's Square, for that purpose, there being no room in Lord Stanley's residence sufficiently large for their reception. In addition to the delegates already named, there were present the noble owner of the mansion; the Earl of Malmesbury; Mr W. Forbes Mackenzie, M.P.; Mr Newdegate, M.P.; Colonel Sibthorp, M.P.; Mr Albert Williams; Mr W. Long of Hurts Hall, Suffolk; Major Playfair, St Andrew's; Mr Ritchie, Dunbar; Professor Aytoun, and Mr Blackwood.

Mr Layton, who was intrusted with the duty of presenting the address to Lord Stanley, said that the gentlemen then present had been deputed by their co-delegates to wait upon his lordship, as the leader of the Protectionist party in the House of Lords, to make known to him the extent of the distress which was at this time prevailing in all parts of the country, and to ask his advice with regard to the course which it was most advisable for them to pursue in the midst of their difficulties. They felt that they had been deserted by a considerable portion of the members of both houses of the legislature, and in this extremity they turned to his lordship, who had so long been the ablest and most powerful of the advocates in this cause. (Hear.) They had that morning had the honour of waiting upon Lord John Russell; but grieved to heart was he to say that the noble lord, the Prime Minister of England, was unwilling in any way to respond to the appeal which had been made to him on behalf of the suffering tenantry of the country. He (Mr Layton) held in his hand a copy of the address which had been submitted to Lord J. Russell, and, with Lord Stanley's permission, would lay it before him, that he might gather therefrom what were the feelings and sentiments which were entertained by the great body of the agricultural community. The delegates were prepared, if his lordship would give them encouragement, to return to their respective localities, and use their best exertions for the purpose of accomplishing the overthrow of that insane policy to which was attributable the distress of which they complained. (Hear.) Mr Disraeli had stated that it was outside the walls of the Houses of Parliament that this great battle was now to be fought. And we are prepared to fight the battle—exclaimed Mr Layton—we are prepared to go into our respective localities, and convince the House of Lords that the yeomanry and tenant-farmers of this country, amongst whom this great movement emanates, will not cease agitating until we have attained our object. (Hear, hear.) We have to-day been taunted by Lord J. Russell that there has been no movement made by the Protectionist party in parliament to reverse the present policy. But, as you, my Lord Stanley, know well, this is for the best of all possible reasons. You know that we have not that support and encouragement in either house, which will warrant an attempt to reverse that iniquitous policy. (Hear, hear.) We have come to town at great expense and inconvenience to ourselves. I myself am deputed from a locality which is distinguished in every respect, alike for the richness of its soil, and the industry, the virtuous habits, and the loyalty of its people—the Isle of Ely. That district comprises 300,000 acres of the most fertile and productive land in the United Kingdom, and yet, with all these advantages, we have been plunged into difficulties; and unless we have the powerful aid and co-operation of men like your lordship, we must inevitably be ruined. (Hear, hear.) If such be the case with a country like that of the Isle of Ely, what must be the state of those districts where the cold clay soils prevail? (Hear, hear.) I am the owner of property, and I find it impossible to collect my rents. Believe me that we do not come here under false colours. We simply desire, as honest men, to inform your lordship of the exact position in which we are placed; and also, I regret to say, of the deplorable condition to which the agricultural labourers are being reduced. With your lordship's permission I will now read the address:—

"TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD STANLEY, &c.

"My Lord,—We have the honour to wait upon your lordship, in your acknowledged character of leader of the great Protection party in the House of Lords. We form a portion of a numerous body of delegates this week assembled in London, from the various local agricultural societies in Great Britain, and our object in troubling your lordship is to represent to you the sentiments of those delegates, and of their constituents, on the present alarming position of the agricultural interest in this kingdom.

"Your lordship has probably seen in the public prints the reports of the proceedings of the great meeting of delegates, held at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, in the Strand, on Tuesday last. The resolutions of that meeting embody generally the sentiments of the delegates on the subjects then under discussion, and to them, therefore, we beg respectfully to refer your lordship, and also to the very important facts stated by the various speakers, and the arguments advanced by them in support of the resolutions.

"Your lordship will be able to collect from them the following distinct propositions:—

"That the existing system of a free importation of foreign agricultural produce is destroying the income of the farmer, and gradually undermining his capital.

"That the labourer, from inadequacy of wages and dearth of employment, is fast approaching a state of poverty and destitution, and that he is becoming discontented, dispirited, and dissatisfied with the laws of his country.

"That land is rapidly declining in value, and in many districts, as well as in the colonies, is becoming unsaleable, except at great sacrifices on the part of the owners.

"That the difficulties of entering into new engagements for the hire of farms are increasing to an alarming extent, and that in various parts of the country occupations have been already abandoned.

"That many of the great trading interests of the country are beginning to feel the mischievous effects of the free trade policy; and the home trade, already in a languishing state, will soon become greatly depressed.

"That in some parts of Scotland and England an extensive emigration of small farmers and labourers prevails, affording the strongest proof that can be adduced of their perilous condition in this country.

"That the evils adverted to are fraught with imminent danger to the best interests of the state, which can only be averted by a just system of import duties based on a fair remuneration to the cultivators of the soil.

"That prompt and efficacious measures of relief ought to be adopted, and any postponement of them to a future session, or a future parliament, may be fatal in its consequences, and may have the effect of seriously damaging, if not of destroying, some of the most valuable of our institutions in Church and State.

"The aforegoing propositions, my lord, we sincerely believe will be found on examination to contain indisputable truths. We have already been in communication on the subject with the First Lord of the Treasury, and we have felt it our bounden duty, in a matter of such vast importance to the national interests, to convey to your lordship a frank and explicit avowal of our sentiments. We firmly believe that any delay in redressing the grievances under which the agricultural and other interests labour, will be found pregnant with danger to the institutions of the country, and, as loyal subjects of the Throne, firmly attached to those institutions, we have not hesitated to give warning of it in every quarter where any degree of responsibility may be considered to rest. We feel well assured your lordship will give to this communication, and to any observations any member of the deputation may address to you, a most anxious and earnest consideration.

"With great respect,
"I have the honour to be, my Lord,
"Your Lordship's very obedient servant,
"William Layton, Chairman,

"And on behalf of the Delegates now assembled in London."

Having informed Lord Stanley of the intended Protectionist meeting at Liverpool at which a great number of agricultural delegates were to be present, Mr Layton concluded by assuring his lordship of the determination of those gentlemen to be guided by his counsels in prosecuting their future crusade against the destructive system of free trade. (Hear, hear.)

Lord STANLEY.—Gentlemen,—I need hardly say to you that I have listened to the observations so forcibly made by Mr. Layton with very mingled feelings. I have listened to them with feelings of deep gratitude for the kindness with which, in your present alarming circumstances, you have expressed the confidence which you feel in me; and at the same time with an earnest desire that you may find that confidence not to have been misplaced, if not with regard to my ability, at least with regard to my inclination to serve you. But mixed with those feelings of personal gratification there cannot but be others of a most painful character. (Hear.) Mr Layton has truly observed that this delegation, and this move, is altogether unparalleled in the history of the country. The agricultural interest is not one that is generally quick to move, eager and ready to combine, or disposed to agitate. (Hear, hear.) It is of all other interests the most stable, the most peaceful, the least excitable; and great indeed must have been the distress of all connected with that interest—of landlords, of tenants, and of labourers—when it has been such as to overcome the natural difficulties which stand in the way of their combination, to excite so mighty a movement as that which is now stirring the country from one end to the other, and to create such a manifestation of opinion as I have read of as displayed in your proceedings the other day, and as I see embodied in the deputation whom I have now the honour to address. But, lamentable as have been the consequences of a mistaken and an insane policy, they are not greater than those which, when that policy was first proposed, I fearfully and anxiously anticipated. (Hear, hear.) So far, at least, I may claim, I hope, some justification for the confidence which you have been pleased to repose in me; for from the first I have never entertained a doubt of the melancholy results that would flow from that policy; and being convinced that that policy was alike unwise and unjust, my part was taken at once. (Hear, hear.) Office, and everything that is gratifying to a public man, was abandoned without hesitation; and to that policy I declared then, as to that policy I repeat my declaration now, that I would not, and I will not be a party. (Hear, hear.) Gentlemen, the anticipations of those who opposed the repeal of the corn laws have been fully accomplished, whilst the predictions of those who justified that repeal, and the arguments by which they sought to vindicate that repeal, have been falsified by the test of experience. (Hear, hear.) Importations of foreign produce have increased to the full amount that we anticipated they would do under the system of free trade. Prices have fallen to the full amount, and to a greater amount, than we ventured to predict, and for predicting which our apprehensions were ridiculed as exaggerated and absurd. The distress has gone on increasing. That distress is still increasing. That distress is pressing upon every portion of the community; and it is the most lamentable part of this case that I feel convinced—and here I must speak to you frankly and plainly—that the reversal of that policy can only be obtained at the expense of still greater suffering on the part of still more extended interests. (Hear.) Mr Layton has stated that we have been taunted in the House of Commons, and taunted in the House of Lords, with bringing forward no specific measure, and asking for no decision by parliament on the merits of this question. Gentlemen, the taunt proceeds from our political opponents, and the advice implied in the taunt being the advice of an enemy, I must take the liberty of regarding it in that light, and not looking upon it as most likely to forward the objects and to be productive of the results which we desire. (Hear, hear.) Firmly adhering to the principle of protection—going along with the resolutions which have been read by Mr Layton—believing that a return to a system of reasonable import duties is indispensable to the prosperity of this country—not accepting the experiment which has been tried as an accomplished fact—not acquiescing in that policy, and determined to do all in my power to reverse it, I in the House of Lords, and my friends in the House of Commons, must be guided as to the course which is most likely to attain our ends in the several assemblies which we have to address, by our own knowledge of the dispositions of the bodies with which we have to deal. I know there are those who say we are slack, that we are not bringing forward measures, nor asking for the decision of the Houses of Parliament. Take the House of Commons to begin with. If we bring forward a distinct proposition, embodying our own principles, what have we to expect from the present House of Commons? Have we to expect—can we believe that that House of Commons, which has sanctioned the free-trade measures of the Government, will stultify itself by reversing its own decision, and pronouncing against the policy which it has approved? (Hear, hear.) If it will not, and still more, if there be some who, agreeing with us, but doubting the policy of bringing forward the question, would desert our ranks, and if the result of raising the question in the House of Commons would be to show an apparently diminishing minority for us, and an apparently increasing majority against us, I ask what advantage have we gained for our cause within the walls of parliament, and what encouragement have we given to our friends out of doors? (Hear, hear.) You and we have different parts to play. I rejoice to see the energy, I rejoice to see the zeal, I rejoice to see the courage and the perseverance with which the agricultural body of England are exerting themselves, and that throughout the length and breadth of the land, in every corner, in every agricultural district—ay, and in the great towns they are working upon public opinion, and compelling the country to look this question in the face, and to judge of the effects which have resulted from our present course. You ask me for advice. I say, Go on, and God prosper you. (Hear, hear.) Do not tire, do not hesitate, do not falter in your course. Maintain the language of strict loyalty to the Crown and obedience to the laws. Do not listen to rash and intemperate advisers, who would urge you to have recourse to unwise and disloyal threats. But with a spirit of unbroken and unshaken loyalty to the Crown, and with a spirit of unswerving obedience to the laws, combine in a determined resolution by all constitutional means to obtain your rights, and to enforce upon those who now misrepresent you the duty of really representing your sentiments and supporting you in Parliament. (Loud cheering.) It is not in the House of Lords—it is not in the House of Commons—it is in the country at large that your battle must be fought, and your triumph must be achieved. (Hear, hear.) You have the game in your own hands. You may compel your present members—or, at least, you may point out to them the necessary, the lamentable consequences to themselves of persisting in their present courses; and when the time shall come you will have it in your own power, by the return of men who really represent your sentiments, to exercise your constitutional influence over the legislature of the country, and to enforce your just demands in another House of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) If, as I said before, it be unwise in my judgment to bring forward a definite proposition in accordance with our own views, as a party question in the House of Commons—I say that, looking at the constitution and character of the House of Lords, it is more unwise still to bring it forward there. Remember that the House of Lords is not like the House of Commons, a fluctuating body, of which one class of representatives may at a general election be replaced by another. The House of Lords is a permanent body, composed for the most part of men advanced in years, exercising their judgment—their independent judgment I will hope, though I won't say I speak confidently (hear, and a laugh)—cautious in coming to a decision, but still more cautious and naturally reluctant to reverse that decision when they have once formed it. At present I lament to say—and there is no use in concealing the fact—we are in a minority in the House of Commons; we are also in a minority in the House of Lords. How then are we to change that minority into a majority? In the House of Commons you have it in your own hands. Through the House of Commons and through the country you may act—not perhaps as speedily or as quickly as you or I might desire; but depend upon it that, when by a general election, or by individual elections as they occur, you have produced an effect upon the judgment and the votes of the House of Commons, the opinion of the country, as represented in the House of Commons, will never be lost upon the House of Lords. (Hear, hear.) The House of Lords, I do not doubt, many of them most unwillingly, gave their assent to the fatal measure which came up recommended by the Commons. I did all in my humble power to prevent their coming to that decision; but I failed in doing so. I should fail still more signally if, the House of Lords having come to that decision, I were to bring forward week after week, or even month after month, specific motions for reversing the decision to which they had so come. (Hear). Men are slow to come forward and confess that they have been mistaken, and, confessing that they have been mistaken, reverse the votes they previously gave; and if I compelled the House of Lords to pronounce a judgment upon the merits of the question month after month, or week after week, every vote given by those—and they are not a few—who have increasing doubts and misgivings, but are not fully convinced as to the mischievous result of the experiment, pledges them anew to the position which they originally took up, and adds to the difficulty of overcoming the present majority. The view which I have taken, and in which I am supported by those of the wisest and soundest judgment with whom I am in the habit of consulting, is not to meet this question by direct motions in the House of Lords for a reversal of this policy, but never to lose an opportunity of showing, if need be, week after week, the progressive effects of the experiment which is now going on. Now, observe, since last year—I will not say since last year, but since the commencement of the present session of Parliament—there has been a material change in the language of the Government. They who a short time ago advocated a reversal of this policy, or even doubted the finality of its adoption, were either scouted as madmen or ridiculed as fanatics. But we now hear the Marquis of Lansdowne, in the House of Lords, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons, speaking of this policy as "an experiment"—as an experiment in course of progress—and no longer as an act that has been decided, and therefore irreversible. They admit, moreover, that prices are low—lower than they expected; and it is admitted also by the Government, not simply that Free Trade has produced low prices, but lower prices than they had ever intended, and they apologise for this effect, which, upon the principles of Free Trade, ought to have been the triumph of their policy. (Hear). Well, then, we have brought them to admit that it is an experiment—we have brought them to admit that this cheapness is not what they intended or desired—we have brought them to apologise for its existence, as an exceptional and temporary state of things, and not attributable to their experiments. And step by step, if it is not the quickest, it is at least the soundest, policy; we shall have first this man and then that man saying, "The experiment has been tried long enough." "I am satisfied that it has not answered the intended purpose." "I think something must be done." "Really matters are become alarming." And gradually, in that manner, and in that manner only, shall we, in a permanent body like the House of Lords, convert a minority against Free Trade into a majority in favour of our protective principles. (Hear). That is the course which I have felt it to be my duty to pursue during the present session of Parliament. That is the course which—not taking the advice of our opponents—I shall continue to pursue. Constantly we shall bring before them the results of their experiment. I hold in my hand at this moment a paper, which I received only this morning, and which was moved for by my noble friend the Earl of Malmesbury this session, in order to controvert an assertion of the Government, that at present prices the foreigner could not by possibility import, that present prices would not pay for the importation, and that we should therefore see a rapid and great diminution of the imports of foreign corn. That was the language which they held so late as the month of January last. I have heard several persons say that February or March would show an improvement in prices. We waited till February and March were past, and at my suggestion the Earl of Malmesbury moved in April for a return, showing the weekly price of wheat in the British markets, and the quantity of corn imported from abroad during each week in the present year. The result is, that, so far from indicating a falling-off in imports, or a rise in price, this return shows that the prices have fallen from 40s. on the 5th day of January, to 37s. 10d. on the 20th of April; whilst the imports have increased from 36,000 quarters of wheat in the second week of January, to 118,000 quarters of wheat, exclusive of flour, in the week ending the 17th of April. And the total amount of imports, in little more than three months, with an average price of from 37s. to 38s. a quarter, has not been far short of 1,000,000 quarters of corn, converting the flour into quarters at the ordinary rate. By the production of this paper before the House of Lords, we disprove the assertions of those who tell us that we have no reason to be alarmed at the course which the experiment is taking, or that at all events we have not sufficient grounds to call on Parliament to put an end to it. And in this course of practical argument from facts as they occur we mean to persevere. I know that this is a policy which is wearisome in its nature. (Hear, hear). I know that "Hope deferred maketh the heart sick." I know that there must be increasing distress. I know that every month and every week that this fearful experiment is in progress the dangers and the difficulties are increasing. But how, with the present constitution of Parliament—how, with the present constitution of the House of Lords—how, with the present constitution of the House of Commons, with the best desire to serve you, with the most earnest and anxious wish to promote your interests—how can we take any step which shall more rapidly force conviction upon the minds of those whom it is necessary to convince before we can attain our ends? (Hear, hear.) I say again, do not complain of our apathy. Believe that we have no such feeling. Believe that we deeply sympathise with the misfortunes of those with whom we are bound up by so many ties; in whom all our interests—not to say our affections, are centred; and if we appear to be less speedy and energetic in the House of Lords and the House of Commons than you would desire us to appear to be, believe that it is not from indifference—believe that it is from a well-calculated policy, and a deliberate adoption of the course by which alone we may attain the object which you and we desire. (Hear, hear.) If you ask my advice, I say persevere in the course you have adopted. Agitate the country from one end to the other. Continue to call meetings in every direction. Do not fear, do not flinch from discussion. By all means accept the offer of holding a meeting in that magnificent building at Liverpool; and in our greatest commercial towns show that there is a feeling in regard to the result of our so-called Free Trade widely different from that which was anticipated by the Free-traders, and from that which did prevail only a few years ago. (Hear, hear). Your efforts may not be so soon crowned with success as you hope; but depend upon it, let us stand hand to hand firmly together; let the landlord, the tenant, and the labourer—ay, and the country shopkeeper—ay, before long, the manufacturer himself, be called on to show and to prove what the effects of this experiment are,—and as sure as we stand together, temperately but firmly determined to assert our rights, so certainly, at the expense, it may be, of intense suffering, and perhaps of ruin to many—of ruin which, God knows, if I could avert I would omit no effort for that purpose—but ultimately, certainly and securely we shall attain our object, and recede from that insane policy which has been pursued during the last few years. (Hear, hear). I have now only to return you my most grateful thanks for the compliment you have paid me in wishing me to receive this deputation. I have heard with the liveliest interest the statements of Mr Layton. If in any part of the country—for now through you I address every district—if there be but one district in which a suspicion is entertained that I am flinching from, or hesitating in my advocacy of, those principles on which I stood in conjunction with my late deeply-lamented friend Lord George Bentinck, I authorise you—one and all of you—to assure those whom you represent, that in me they will find no hesitation, no flinching, and no change of opinion; that, attached as I have ever been to the principle of Protection, that attachment remains unchanged; and I only look for the moment when it may be possible for us to use the memorable words of the Duke of Wellington on the field of Waterloo, and to say, "Up, Guards, and at them!" (Loud cheers.)

Mr PAUL FOSKETT.—My Lord Stanley, I know I speak the universal sentiments of the delegates who have attended our meetings this week, when I say that the address you have just delivered to us has penetrated our heart of hearts, and has made us feel that under your leadership our triumph is secure. (Cheers.) We shall now return to our several homes, and "agitate," "agitate," "agitate," until our object is attained. (Hear, hear.)

After a few observations from Mr Newdegate, Mr Box, (of Buckinghamshire,) and Mr Malins, (of Derbyshire,)

Mr LAYTON expressed the gratification he experienced at the result of the interview with Lord Stanley. They might all take comfort that they had such a leader and friend; and on the part of the delegation and the tenantry and labourers of the land, he begged to convey to his lordship his unqualified admiration and thanks for the manner in which he had received the deputation, and for the encouragement and hope he had held out to the various suffering interests of the country. (Hear, hear.)

Lord STANLEY in taking leave of the deputation, hoped that on their return to their several localities their efforts would be crowned with success. They might depend upon it, that whilst they kept up the pressure from without, if they would authorise him, he would not fail to keep up the pressure within.

The deputation then took their leave; and upon re-assembling at the King's Arms,

Mr LAYTON briefly reported the reception which had been given to them by Lord Stanley; and amidst the enthusiastic cheering of the audience, the following resolution was unanimously adopted:—

"That this meeting cannot separate without recording their grateful acknowledgments to Lord Stanly for the courteous and satisfactory reception he has afforded them this day, and their high gratification at the encouraging approval he has expressed of the steps they are taking; and they beg his lordship will receive the assurance of their perfect confidence in his powerful and talented advocacy of the cause of Protection in the House of Lords.

"That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to Lord Stanley."

It was also resolved,—

"That it is the opinion of the delegates now assembled in London, that a meeting in Liverpool, on as early a day as practicable, is highly desirable; and the delegates now present pledge themselves to support such meeting by personal attendance as far as practicable.

"And that as circumstances may occur, either during the present session of Parliament or after a prorogation, which may render it necessary for the delegates to reassemble in London, this meeting of delegates be at its rising adjourned till again summoned by the committee of the National Association, to which summons they will be ready instantly to respond; and that in such case, this meeting considers that one delegate at least for each district should attend the meeting."

After the transaction of some routine business, the meeting separated.