Douglas can tell how England rewards her gallant and chivalrous sons!Graham how dishonour thrives! There is something peculiarly touching in the recital of such a tale from a woman's lips. I have heard Lady Douglas relate the history. She was on board the Cambridge. It was her custom to share her husband's dangers-she now divides his griefs. I wish that you, the father of nine daughters, had heard and seen the heroine, as I have done to-day. She can tell of the sad disaster-of the sudden and unexpected intrusion of the sheriff's officer with the summons, "I enter an execution"-of the sale of horses, carriages, and furniture. Yes, she can unmoved tell thus far of the breaking up of home, but sobs interrupted when she told me how the nautical instruments were sacrificed! She added, as well as the heaving, almost bursting heart would permit her, " All, all were sold-nay, even the presents which my mother gave me; they were sold-nothing was left me." Three thousand pounds worth were knocked down for seven hundred! Thus, more than the gratuity which Government allowed the gallant Captain was swept away-then he was lodged in prison! You should, Sir, witness the anguish of Lady Douglas now, and study the brow of the gallant hero, sitting in an English debtors' cell, calmly soothing her, "Never mind, my dear, I will never lower my flag-some day we shall have justice!" What sights we see in jail! They have three children! What are the merchants of England doing? Will they allow Douglas to remain in jail? Is not this an interesting tale? It is a tale that will be told when you and I and Douglas shall be on an equality-returned to our dust. But, Sir, out of this history a solemn question arises. If British subjects, for their exertions on such "almost fatal emergencies," are thus neglected, nay, persecuted, (imprisonment in a debtors' jail is now, since you were appointed Keeper, persecution,) what chance is there, I ask, in future, that, in "almost fatal emergencies," British subjects will risk their all to defend their country's weal, and the lives and property of their fellow subjects? When William Pitt was Minister, an insurrection suddenly broke out at the Cape of Good Hope. Brook, a rich civilian, was returning home from the East Indies. Money was wanted by the Governor-Brook advanced it. Pitt repaid and remunerated him, and honoured Brook with a Baronetcy. Brook was not wounded he had not been driven from his profitable occupation-he was not proscribed by the enemy and imprisoned by the English; and why?" Peel is not Pitt!". I must now turn from the consideration of this isolated, interesting case, remarking, that while Captain Douglas is a prisoner for debt, in England, in consequence of the important services rendered by him to the nation in “an almost fatal emergency" in the Chinese affair, England is receiving fifteen million. dollars from China in purchase of a settlement of the quarrel in which Douglas's services were so important to British interests! The long and important debate in the House of Commons, on Lord Howick's motion, again demands my attention. In addition to the statements which were made by the noble mover, I must not omit those of Mr. C. Wood, M.P. for Halifax; again reminding you that I select these two witnesses because they have always been strenuous supporters of the New Poor Law, and were among the most noisy and sturdy of those who prophesied that that measure would "elevate the character and improve the condition of the working classes of England." After eight years woeful experience of the destructive effects of that fatal measure, it is thus that the honourable member for Halifax describes the condition of England :- Mr. C. WooD expressed his surprise that, after the admissions and statements which had been made by several hon. members in proof of the general nature of the distress, two hon. gentlemen, the members for Durham and Shrewsbury, should have ventured to assert that it was but local. If those hon. gentlemen only referred to the admissions and opinions of hon. members on their own side of the House, they would have but too good reasons to be satisfied that the distress at present existing was more general and severe than any that had occurred within the memory of the oldest man amongst them. There had been an extraordinary increase of distress in Leeds, as was shown by the increase in the number of persons relieved from the poor-rates. In 1840 the number of persons relieved amounted to 3,400, in 1841 to 7,300, and in 1842 to 14,800. Thus the number was doubled in one year, and trebled in two. Referring to the adjacent township of Holbeck, the poor-rates, in 1840, amounted to 1,9007., and in 1842 to 3,8007. In the township of Idle, a few miles distant, the poor-rates amounted, in 1839, to 9007., in 1840 to 1,4007., in 1841 to 1,7001., and in 1842 to 2,100. In a township at some distance, not connected with Leeds, and carrying on a different branch of trade, the number of paupers relieved in 1840 amounted to 1,000, and in 1812 to 2,000. He might make similar statements with respect to other townships in the same riding, but he thought enough had been said on this part of the subject. Whence did this increase of pauperism in Leeds arise? From the loss of capital, the want of employment, and the diminished means of paying wages. In the last four years no less than ninety-four firms had become insolvent in Leeds, and their liabilities amounted to 1,500,000/., and what dividend did the House suppose had been paid upon that sum? The dividend did not exceed 5s. in the pound. In one trade alone the sum paid for wages was less than that paid when the people were in full employment by no less an amount than 430,000. Thus it was manifest that the means of employing the people were diminished; and the consequence was, distress and misery among the labouring population, starvation, and death. The accounts from the superintendent registrar of that district showed that there had been an increase of mortality to no less an amount than 3 per cent. in two years. The number of births had decreased; but, he grieved to say, that the illegitimate births had increased. This was the state of the largest town in the West Riding of Yorkshire; and the distress in Lancashire was even greater. He felt he was warranted in asserting the suffering of the people was general and severe, such as had never before existed, from one end of the kingdom to the other; and in the midst of such a state of things, the Government stated that they were prepared to do nothing." Before the infliction of the New Poor Law, Leeds was one of the most thriving towns in England. Perhaps Mr. Wood will argue, with reference to Leeds, as Lord Howick, his brother-in-law, did with reference to Scotland, and say, "The New Poor Law is not introduced in Leeds, and consequently, it cannot be that law which has brought so much misery into that town." The answer to such "common sense" nonsense is short and easy:-" The condition of Leeds must partake of the general distress, and deteriorate in proportion to other places, because the labour which is reduced in value and driven out of other parts will flock to Leeds, and by its pressure, aided by the unlimited use of machinery, and the general competition of trade, it must ruinously affect Leeds, as it does Scotland." Hence we find, even on the authority of Mr. C. Wood, that Leeds is attempting to right itself by getting rid of those superabundant labourers whom the New Poor Law has transported from the agricultural districts. He says,― "But there was another effect which the distress amongst the manufacturers had produced upon the agricultural districts, an effect of which gentlemen of the north of England were more sensible than those of the south, and it arose from the amount of labour thrown back upon the rural districts in consequence of the impossibility of employing it in the manufacturing districts, though there these labourers had been in the habit of obtaining their livelihood for years. This evil went to an extent of which he was sure many hon. members were not aware. Now, he found that in Leeds alone the number of families put under orders of removal in 1840 amounted to 100; in 1841, to 137; and in 1842, to 313; and thus, taking the ordinary calculations of five persons to each family, it appeared that in the last year no less than 1,500 paupers had been put under orders of removal, and thrown back upon the rural parishes where they had settlements, though probably they had been employed in Leeds for a long series of years. He would just make another statement on the point, from Settle, in Yorkshire. The Settle Union consisted of thirty parishes, 21 of which were agricultural. In that union in the year 1841 there were 832 paupers altogether. In 1842 that number had increased to 1,637, being an increase of 805, and out of that 805 no less than 299 persons had been sent back to the rural parishes from the manufacturing districts. Now, he (Mr. C. Wood) must say, that these removals formed a considerable addition to the burdens of the rural parishes, which already had a large surplus of labour." Now, this is a most important admission ;-coming from Mr. C. Wood it is doubly so. It happened that, some years ago, when I resided at Fixby Hall, and, (foreseeing, as I did, that the consequence of their introduction would be ruinous to themselves and the manufacturing operatives,) was endeavouring to prevent the migration of agricultural labourers into the manufacturing districts-it so happened, as I have already told you, that this same Mr. C. Wood, when he was speechifying to his constituents, my fellow parishioners, at one of the Whig messes in Halifax, denounced me as a very ignorant and a very dangerous man, because I foretold that which he now admits to have since occurred, and takes every opportunity of describing. Is it unreasonable to ask gentlemen who have been proved to be so completely ignorant to refrain from offering any more of their nostrums? I cannot refuse, whilst I am on this subject, quoting a few words from Mr. C. Wood's speech at "a tea party" in Halifax, on the 29th of November last. He then said, “His friend (Mr. E. Akroyd) had alluded to the pressure on the poor-rates and on the destitution of the labouring portion of the population of the town. That distress was extending itself to the agricultural districts, and that in consequence of the distress in the manufacturing districts. He sat weekly at the board of guardians at Doncaster, purely an agricultural district, and what happened there almost every day? The case was this; a man came for relief. The question first asked him was, 'Who are you?' 'I am, Sir, a spinner from the neighbourhood of Huddersfield. What do you come here for? Why Sir, the mill in which I worked is stopped, and myself, and wife and children are out of employment, and we are driven to our natural parish to seek for maintenance by the farmers.' The next case was that of a great stout man.' Who are you? I am a slubber from Leeds, the mill in which I worked stopped, or was put on short time; I have been out of employment two months; I have maintained myself on my previous earnings, which were good, but these are now gone, and I have come here to my parish for relief.' Such cases occurred four or five times every day they sat at the board, coming from parishes bordering on the district. The poor-rates were increased in consequence, and thus they suffered from the distresses in the manufacturing parts." The question of the utility or inutility of the migration scheme, is to me one of peculiar interest, because it so happened that my exertions to prevent its being put into operation brought down upon me, not only the denunciations of the Whigs, but the persecution of my then employer. My labours to serve the poor deluded victims, and prevent their advance upon the mauufacturing districts, forced me into a direct collision with him. The consequence was my discharge and my subsequent imprisonment. It is satisfactory to know, by the admission of the Prime Minister, who still pertinaciously adheres to the New Poor Law, that I was not mistaken-it is still more so to obtain the testimony of Mr. C. Wood, (who was engaged in denouncing me in my own parish,) that, after all, the migration scheme has failed, and that my worst forebodings have been realized. But to return to the debate. Ministers could not deny the existence of distress-the Queen had announced it. But they had no remedy to propose, nor would they condescend to inquire! Mr. Ferrand withdrew his amendment because he could obtain no seconder; and Lord Howick's motion for inquiry was negatived by 306 to 191. So that, as far as Ministers or Parliament are concerned, the land-owners and farmers, manufacturers, merchants, and shopkeepers, the labourers and artisans, may, as we say in Yorkshire, "bite their lips and bide it." It is certain, however, the game cannot last very long, although Peel is Prime Minister. Necessity will, eventually, force his followers to withdraw their confidence they will soon find that genius of a higher order, and patriotism of a warmer and nobler nature, are required in this "almost fatal emergency." It is impossible to account for the apathy of you and your colleagues, except on the assumption that the God of this world has blinded you. A case of more astounding national wretchedness was never before brought before a Legislature-more solemn warnings were never uttered from the graves of statesmen than those of Pitt and the elder Peel, which were so strenuously enforced by Mr. Ferrand : The time will come when manufactures will have been so long established, and the operatives not having any other business to flee to, it will be in the power of any one man in a town to reduce the wages, and all the other manufacturers must follow. Then, when you are goaded with reductions, and made willing to flee your country, France and America will receive you with open arms; and then farewell to your manufacturing superiority. If ever it does arrive at this pitch, Parliament, if it be not then sitting, ought to be called together; and if it cannot redress your grievances, its power is at an end. Tell me not that Parliament cannot-IT IS OMNIPOTENT TO PROTECT."-(Pitt.) Such indiscriminate and unlimited employment of the poor, consisting of a great proportion of the inhabitants of trading districts, will be attended with effects to the rising generation so serious and alarming, that I cannot contemplate them without dismay. And then that great effort of British ingenuity, whereby the machinery of our manufactures has been brought to such perfection, instead of being a blessing to the nation, WILL BE CONVERTED INTO THE BITTEREST CURSE." (The Elder Peel.) All would not do-inquiry was rejected; and no cure was suggested, but a stronger dose was administered of that poison which had already benumbed the energies of England another "large stride in the right direction." Free Trade!-Free Trade !-UNIVERSAL competition!! I am your Victim, RICHARD OASTLER. P.S. Surely I shall find room next week for my letter to friend Pounderthis space will serve for continuation of " Rent-Roll." 1842. June 2.-A brother-prisoner from Yorkshire gave me three Yorkshire "cheesecakes." 3. Another prisoner cheered me with a bottle of cordial. 9. An old Yorkshire friend gave my adopted child a silk gown; and 11. Rev. J. Gould gave me his pamphlet On the Illegality of Imprisonment for Debt.' 12.—A prisoner presented me with a quantity of strawberries. 14. The wife of a prisoner gave me the portrait of their lovely boy. A very old friend presented me with one bottle of cordial, cherries, a pot of preserves, a pot of marmalade, and a valuable fan each for my wife and child. 15. My valued and lamented friend, Dr. Maginn, gave me his meershaum, with his and my initials engraved thereon by himself. Mr. Bennock, London, brought me a quantity of fine strawberries. 16. Lord Ashley, M.P., sent me a copy of his Speech on Mines. 18. A country friend brought me some cucumbers, strawberries, melons, a splendid boquet, &c. &c. 19. Mr. Tweedale, Dewsbury, gave me a bottle of cordial. 20.-Dr. Heath, London, sent me a stilton cheese and a quantity of spice biscuits. Mr. Squire Auty, Bradford, Yorkshire, forwarded to me a large Anti- 21.-Mr. Chappelow, London, brought me a large boquet. 25.-W. B. Ferrand, Esq., M.P., sent me a brace of Yorkshire rabbits. Mr. Stocks, Huddersfield, brought me six pigeons. 29.-A dear old friend gave me a bottle of cordial; her son sent me a quantity of cherries and strawberries. Ester Verity gave me a quarter of a pound of tobacco. Mr. Chappelow brought me another boquet. 30.-W. B. Ferrand, Esq., M.P., gave me a sovereign. No more at present.-R.O. Printed by Vincent Torras & Co., 7, Palace Row, New Road, London. |