Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

not, however, have been excited, because he would have been both detected and defeated by an instrument made by himself.

Lord Brougham confesses nothing, although he admits everything. The facts produced by himself are his own condemnation; and we have Sir Robert Peel's warranty, that his Lordship's "safe and effectual remedy" was the immediate cause of spreading "the remorseless pestilence, the foul disease," into "those seats of industry, where the miracles of labour and of skill have established the great triumph of the arts, and shed unnumbered blessings on all around;" for the Premier has assured us, that one immediate cause of the present distress in the manufacturing districts, is "the immigration of labour from the rural districts into districts the seat of manufacture." Now, that "immigration" was entirely effected by the Poor Law Commissioners. Thus is Lord Brougham proved to be the destroyer of England's "last pillar"!

There is, however, one wholesome feature in Lord Brougham's last speechhe now exhibits the entire absence of self-confidence. We hear no more of such blustering folly as "WE CAN, and WE MUST stay the wide-spreading ruin""I KNOW that the SAME HAND which lays bare the disease to your eyes, and makes its naked deformity horrible in your sight, WILL BE ENABLED, by your assistance, TO APPLY TO THE FOUL DISEASE A SAFE AND EFFECTUAL REMEDY." All that he now asks for is (and that with great modesty) "A select committee to consider the distressed state of the country."" How are the mighty fallen!" "How is the gold become dim! how is the most fine gold changed!"

If the country is to be subjected to another experiment of Lord Brougham's -it is, however, clear, from the hints given by his Lordship, that a still deeper draught from the cup of "Free Trade" will be his next specific, indeed, "the State Physician" himself seems prepared to administer that cleansing draughtif so, there will be no need that any one should "shake" the patient when "the medicine is taken," for he will be sure to shake himself!

[ocr errors]

But, Sir, you have a large stake in the country-I therefore ask you seriously, Is it not time that wisdom should interpose, and that political quackery should at length be subjected to the severest scrutiny of the national mind?

Under this impression, I wish that the Lords had not rejected Lord Brougham's motion for "consideration," but that they had accepted his challenge, and instituted a searching investigation into the real causes of the appalling distress by which the country is now afflicted. It is, indeed, disgusting to remark, that on such an occasion, our governors evince a dread of meeting an inquiryidly and culpably turning away from investigation, and thus giving an apparent victory to one who has been foremost in demolishing the noblest principles of the English Constitution, under the false plea of restoring prosperity by an increase of the very means which have plunged us so deeply into adversity.

I ask, I ask seriously of you and of every reader, Has not Lord Brougham himself proved that THE NEW POOR LAW IS A FAILURE? Was not Eldon a wiser man than Brougham?-Well, then, shall we progress in folly, or return to the paths of wisdom? -Aye! there is the rub!-I am, your Prisoner,

P.S.-No "Rent-Roll" this week.-R.O.

RICHARD OASTLER.

Printed by Vincent Torras & Co., 7, Palace Row New Road, London.

Being Letters to

THOMAS THORNHILL, Esq.,

Of Riddlesworth, in the County of Norfolk;

FROM

RICHARD OASTLER,

His Prisoner in the Fleet.

WITH OCCASIONAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM FRIENDS.

"The Altar, the Throne, and the Cottage."-"Property has its duties, as well as its rights.” "The Husbandman that laboureth, must be first partaker of the fruits."

"He shall judge the poor of the people, He shall save the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces the Oppressor."

VOL. II.-No. 32.

LONDON, SATURDAY, AUGUST 6, 1842.

PRICE 2d.

The Fleet Prison.

THOMAS THORNHILL, Esq.

SIR,-Well, then, there needs no discussion about the fact. That distress of a most alarming character does overspread the land, no one can doubt the dying moans of the starving are echoed by the Queen! We have no longer to contend with incredulous mill-owners and manufacturers about that fact. In 1834, they preached about prosperity, denied the existence of distress, and constantly abused myself and others for hinting, That their work-people were ill-requited, although at that time the hand-loom weavers were luxuriating upon "green-tail" beef.* Now, however, when they are feasting on horse-flesh, the truth is admitted by their employers-they agree that overwhelming distress. exists. Yes, let the cause be what it may, it is now granted, on all hands, that the distress which prevails in England is such as was never experienced beforesuch as cannot long be endured. It has latterly spread upwards, as I said it would do-it has made those smart who were formerly incredulous. They would not sympathize with others-now, they feel the pangs of poverty themselves!

That fact, of the existence of great distress, being universally admitted, it is desirable that the united energies of the people should be directed to find out, What is the cause? That Lord Brougham, and the gentlemen of the "Useful Knowledge" school, are mistaken in their view of the case, is certain; for, as I showed you in my last letter, his Lordship, in 1834, was positively sure that the New Poor Law would prove "a safe and effectual remedy" for almost all the ills which England is heir to; that it was the harbinger of universal prosperity, and would most assuredly "restore to industry its due reward, and visit idleness with its appropriate punishment; reinstate property in security, and lift up, once more-God be praised!-the character of that noble English peasantry to the proud eminence where, but for the [old] Poor Laws, it would still have shone untarnished-the admiration of mankind, and the glory of the country which boasts it as its brightest ornament!"

Those who then pinned their faith on Brougham's sleeve, must now be convinced that his Lordship laboured under a great mistake; for, on his own * The name given to a cow which was dying of Dysentery, and which was "killed to save its life," as the country-people about O'Cot (four miles from Fixby Hall) were wont to say.-R.O.

showing, the effect of his "safe and effectual remedy" has been just such as I anticipated that it would be-it has made matters worse and worse.

Instead of having "lifted up the noble English peasantry," it has sunken them to a state of distress which his Lordship declares to be "without a parallel, compared with which their former distress was a state of prosperity."

A more perfect and complete admission of entire failure cannot be required, than that which is thus furnished from Lord Brougham's lips.

*

It is very strange, that such a self-convicted Quack should still be receiving 5,000l. a year, as a retaining fee, from his deluded patients, "the parents of wealth," who are, poor things, according to his own account, (after adopting his specific for eight years,) "by thousands, reduced to a pittance by which life might be rather said to be endured than sustained!"-"Whose wages are reduced, in some instances, to 6d. per week-rather less than even one penny for each and every day !"—" Remaining on their bed of straw for two successive days, because they are under the impression, that in a recumbent posture the pangs of hunger will be less severely felt than in an erect position! Those who are able to crawl about living on matters which ought not to be eaten at least, not as the food of man-and who might be said to envy those who fed on the husks of swine!" or who are, in groups of " seven, or eight, or ten persons in one cottage, for days—not a day,' but for days'—without a morsel of food of any kind!” and whose "mothers, with infants at their breasts, are found dying in the streets for want of food!" Is it not, I say, Sir, strange, that after having, by his "safe and effectual remedy," reduced "the noble English peasantry" to a condition which is thus described by himself, Lord Brougham should have the hardihood to pocket 5,000l. a year out of the proceeds of their labour? Well might his Lordship, being conscience-stricken, turn pale, and exclaim, "My LORDS, I AM AFRAID TO DEAL WITH MATTERS SO FRIGHTFUL!"

[ocr errors]

It may, perhaps, be imagined by some, that, notwithstanding its ruinous effects upon the labourers, his Lordship's "safe and effectual remedy" has succeeded in reinstating property in security," or in retarding the rapidity with which, he said, it was, in 1834, "hurrying with accelerated rapidity towards the brink of a precipice." Lord Brougham shall give the answer to such dreamers himself. After eight years' experience, he has thus described the wasting and unsatisfactory condition of property in England :-" Looms are idle, houses untenanted, rents falling to one-half, one-third, and sometimes even lower. Cottages, to the number of three out of four, are deserted."-" The poor-rates are increased, in some districts, FOUR-FOLD, and in others they are raised to DOUBLE that amount, while the defalcation of the property on which it used to be assessed has gone on from 20, to 30, to 40, and sometimes to 50 per cent., compared with what it was two years ago!!!" So much for the effects of the New Poor Law!

Amidst all this devastation and desolation amongst the property of Englishmen, the Quack, (whose nostrum has, in a great degree, caused it,) while he is terrified to "shuddering" at the misery and poverty which his measure has assisted to create, still quietly resolves to pocket 5,000l. a year from his Patients, as a pension for his fee. Now this, Sir, ought not to be. How many worthy English artisans are now "for days-not a day,' but for days'-without a morsel of

food of any kind," in order to raise the above enormous annual sum, to pamper the appetite of the man who has been the principal means of reducing them to starvation!

Is it not, at all events, to be hoped, before any further physicing is agreed upon, (if there be still any doubt upon the subject,) that now the real cause of the overwhelming misery should be ascertained? For myself, so thoroughly am I convinced that our national interests can bear no more quackery, I proposed, a short while ago, that a public discussion on the subject should be held in London, between a friend of mine (I could not attend myself) and any person to be named by the Anti-Corn-Law-League. I proposed to admit the existence of great distress, in order to avoid any appeal to the feelings-to exclude all political topics from the discussion, to prevent party prejudice or bias-in fact, to confine the discussion simply to the principles and operation of the free, or restrained and regulated system of commerce. Although I sent my proposal by Mr. Hamer Stansfeld, of Leeds, who was then in London, and who, at my request, called upon me, I have received no reply. Afterwards, I found that my kind friend, Dr. Sleigh, had made the same proposal, to the same gentleman, with no better success. This refusal to discuss the question is, I think, no credit to the Anti-Corn-Law-Leaguers. It warrants the suspicion that they are not honest. They should be ashamed to assert, as they often do, "Our opponents avoid discussion as they would the Plague."

Soon after those proposals, to discuss the whole question, were made, a meeting of the merchants, bankers, and traders of London, convened by the AntiCorn-Law delegates, was held (July 20) at the City of London Tavern, Bishopsgate Street, for the purpose of taking into consideration the present depressed state of trade, and of devising means to relieve the consequent distress prevailing throughout the country. At half-past three o'clock, William Leaf, Esq. (whose name I never hear pronounced without being reminded of certain wholesale smuggling transactions) was called to the chair. The following gentlemen of the AntiCorn-Law-League addressed the meeting: Mr. Bright, Rochdale; Mr. Chappell, Manchester; Mr. Ashworth, Turton; Provost Henderson, Paisley; Mr. Brooks, Manchester; Mr. Heyworth, Liverpool; and Mr. Holland Hoole, Manchester.

Their speeches were principally filled with complaints against the "cheapening" process, to which mills, machinery, and manufactured goods have, of late, been subjected. To the uninitiated, it appears very strange, that "cheapness" should offend those whose catechism is, "Buy at the cheapest market." The "lecturers" of these smugglers' associates are everlastingly prating about the benefits to be derived from "cheapness" in land, labour, cattle, corn, &c.; why, then, should they set up an universal yell against "cheapness" in their own commodities-mills, machinery, &c.? Without impeaching their honesty, I cannot discover a solution of this enigma. I must, therefore, leave others to find out and explain the reason why "cheap" mills, machinery, &c. are offensive to the Anti-Corn-Law-Leaguers. It. surely cannot be, that persons who profess to be, par excellence, the Philanthropists of the age, should wish to rob their neighbours by "cheapening" their property in land and labour, for the purpose of enabling manufacturers to "sell dear," and thus "accumulate wealth" at the expense of others? This is a knotty question-I must leave it.

-

Mr. Wilkinson, of London, followed the gentlemen already named, and proposed the late Mr. Cobbett's celebrated petition, which did not meet with a seconder.

When Mr. Ashworth had spun a very long yarn, a gentleman on the floor rose, and, on being asked his name, said, "He was generally designated Captain Barrett; that he had publicly lectured to prove that the Corn Laws were advantageous to the country, and which he would endeavour to establish before the present meeting, if he were permitted to address them. Much time (he said) had been lost by the oft-repeated statements of the depressed state of commerce, and the alarming condition of the working classes, all of which the meeting was already cognizant of. It was his opinion, that the two points to which the attention of the meeting should be directed were, the causes of the existing evils, and the remedy." The Chairman said, that "He had one more gentleman of the League on his list, and after he had been heard, the Captain should be allowed to address the meeting." This, however, the Captain was not permitted to do.

Dr. Sleigh next presented himself, and, as nobody else has reported his speech, I will. I asked a friend, who was present taking notes, for a report, with which he has kindly furnished me. It is rather long, but, as the other speeches have appeared in so many papers and forms, it is only fair that the worthy Doctor should have one hearing:

Dr. Sleigh (late Delegate of the Society for the Protection of Agriculture) rose, and begged to call the attention of the meeting to the fact, that two hours and a half had already been consumed, without any proposition having been made by those who called the meeting, or without the least light having been thrown on the causes of that dreadful and appalling distress, which every man who had not a heart of stone must sincerely lament. If (said the Doctor) you imagine that you can influence the people of this metropolis by your ex parte statements, you will find yourselves greatly mistaken; but if you wish to have all parties,-Whigs, Tories, Radicals, and Chartists,-unite with you in endeavouring to remove or mitigate the sufferings of our unfortunate fellow subjects, you must be prepared to have the real causes of the distress fairly and thoroughly discussed in the presence of the public. It is not my intention, Mr. Chairman, to consume the time of this meeting by making a speech, or by, at present, discussing the merits or demerits of the Corn Laws, but simply to propose a resolution which I hold in my hand, and which I had intended to be in the shape of an amendment. This resolution will not, I conceive, be objected to by any reasonable person present, nor will any of the Anti-Corn-Law gentlemen dare to oppose it, without running the risk of exhibiting incontrovertible evidence that he is conscious his views and arguments cannot abide the result of an impartial investigation. The resolution does not attempt to say what the causes of the present distress may be-it only calls upon you to prove that you are willing to bring your views to the light. I shall now read the resolution:

"Forasmuch as it is of the first importance that the real causes of any evil be distinctly and correctly ascertained, in order that it may be effectually treated; and whereas the causes of the present lamentable distress have not been hitherto discussed in such a way as to enable the public to form a correct judgment thereon; it is the opinion of this meeting, that a thorough, impartial, dispassionate, and public discussion on this subject, to be held with as little delay as possible, would be a prudent and judicious proceeding, prior to coming to any public decision thereon.'

Can any one find fault with the object of this resolution? A certain book says, 'Men love darkness rather than light'-I need not add, Why? I do not wish to apply it to any body of persons; but this I do say, that if the Anti-Corn-Law gentlemen oppose this resolution, their conduct will look very suspicious! This is the course I could have wished Sir Robert Peel had adopted at the commencement of this session; that is, to have instituted a thorough investigation into the causes of the distress; and, having clearly proved what those causes were, to have instantly removed them. If the Corn Laws, away with them, say I; but I never shall consent to sanction

« AnteriorContinuar »