Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

be still worse than it is. If we are fools, we are so in the company of one of acknowledge. judgment and experience-we do but tread in the steps of the elder and the wiser (though not sơ learned) Peel.

“The father of the Premier applied to Parliament for the self-same measure; and when he did so, he said, 'The 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 thus the 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.'

[ocr errors]

"We believed, that the refusal of the Legislature to follow the advice of that experienced statesman and wealthy manufacturer, had afforded proof that his fears were just. We thought, that the evidence of his wisdom, and the folly of his sagacious opponents, was to be seen in that BITTER CURSE' which has desolated the homes of millions. We therefore reiterated our cry for protection, amidst the contempt and hatred of our opponents, who, demanding still more freedom,' applied to the Poor Law Commissioners for an increase in the numerous subjects on which to operate. They then obtained thousands of the agricultural poor, for the avowed purpose of reducing the wages of those who were already employed in the mills.

66

'When that mad, cruel scheme was adopted, we prognosticated its result-increased distress. True, we were laughed at. Again we were denounced as fools, until, at length, we have the recognition of the truth of all our fears, from the lips of the Premier himself, who, in tracing the causes of the great distress which has prevailed so long in the factory districts, declared, that one of those causes was to be found in the immigration of labour from the rural districts into districts the seats of manufacture.' We witness, as we predicted, the return of those of the transported labourers whom death has spared to their native districts, poorer and more wretched than when they left.

"Well, then, my kind friends, if we thus review our position and our principles, we have no cause to charge ourselves with folly.

66

It is true, that the wealth of our opponents has given them an increase of power, and we are doomed to witness, for a season, the progress of their principles. At present, England will not learn by experience. While other nations are wisely wrapping themselves up in the mantle of Protection, it would seem that our Government is resolved to unloose every restraint-break down every regulation—and lay labour defenceless at the feet of capital. For awhile, that fever of Philosophy will progress-but not always.

"When England shall awake out of this trance, she will shake herself from her funereal dress --she will seek for TRUTH, and find it in our principles.

"Keep, then, your union well cemented-it has never been broken. While other friends of the working classes are divided and are engaged in destroying each other, the band of the TEN HOURS BILL has remained fast tied and unbroken. LET NO JARRINGS INTERRUPT YOUR Your day of active exertion is not far distant-your day of victory is sure.

UNION.

"Believe me, my friends, it has done me good to chatter with you this while. My thoughts have centred as they were wont to do-in yours, the childrens', and the labourers' cause.

[ocr errors]

I will not apologize for this long letter-I was in a scribbling mood, and your kind remembrance of me called for a response. May it be to your liking.

“Well, then, thank you for your sympathy-but no more on't. Be up and doing, and cheer my soul in prison by once more raising the standard of the Ten Hours Bill. Then will you make a diversion in favour of Constitutional principles, and form a centre round which the friends of wellpoised liberty may rally.

·

"Thus will you again carry the war into the enemy's camp, and give them other work than the annihilation of the aristocracy,' or the destruction of yourselves, the Church, and the Constitution. "If I have one wish for liberty, it is that I might personally aid you in this fresh conflict with our foes. But you need not my presence. You have many who are able and willing to work in that field-call them out-give them their posts-I know that they will keep them.

"Truly, my kind friends, my heart warms while I write to you-my blood flows quicker than it did-hope smiles-victory waits-she waits to crown the constant and the brave!

"To your work, then, and you will conquer!

"Let me hear of your progress. Tell me, how can I aid? Give me any post within my reach, and I will maintain it.

"Commend me to your wives and to the children-tell them to pray for me, and for our cause; and remember. MEN, though absent, I am watching and listening.

64

Good night, my faithful friends—good night. God guard you all! Amen.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

"The Queen's Prison, (how disgraceful that this place should be called after our Queen,)

December 17, 1842.

"P.S.—I thank my kind friend Swallow, your Secretary, for the letter which his warm heart indicted, and which accompanied your welcome resolution.

“Truly I have reason to be proud of you all. Who shall now say that the working men of England are ungrateful.-R.O."

Is it wrong thus to write to working men?

To make room for that which I have promised,—my "Rent-Roll,”—I must omit some subjects which press upon my mind, and suddenly conclude.

I am your Victim,

RICHARD OASTLER.

P.S.-It so happens, that in my hurried removal from the Fleet Prison, I
have lost, or mislaid, some papers, amongst the rest, a leaf out of my
"Rent-
Roll," containing the entries between March the 5th and 29th. Should I after-
wards find that sheet, it shall be inserted. Meantime, I must proceed.
Mar. 29. Mr. J. Stephens presented me with a copy of "The Life and Labours
of Adam Clark, L.L.D." I remember, the first time I spoke in
public, was when Dr. Clark occupied the chair.

30.-Mr. J. Inman, London, (late of Huddersfield,) brought me half a pound
of tobacco.

D. Urquhart, Esq., presented me with a copy of "Diplomatic Trans-
actions in Central Asia."

April 2.-Mr. Twells, Birmingham, brought me some figs and raisins.

5.-Mrs. Robert Meek gave me a large "spice" cake.

7. Mrs. Solomon, London, gave me tamarinds and flannel to cure my sore
throat.

9.-W. B. Ferrand, Esq., M.P., brought me a ream of letter-paper.

Mr. C. W. Stafford, Hull, sent me a fine cod fish, from the Yorkshire
coast.

13. Mrs. Ward, 16, Artillery Street, gave me one quire of paper and a
quantity of pens.

14.-Wm. Beckett, Esq., M.P., sent me 47. 108.

18.-A few friends from Norfolk brought me half a pound of tea and two
pounds of sugar.

21. Mr. J. Tweedale, Dewsbury, gave me one pound of tobacco.

23. Sir George Sinclair, Bart., sent me a cod's head and shoulders, with
oysters.

27.—Mr. Hopkinson, mechanic, Huddersfield, gave me 2s. 6d.

A Manchester friend sent me a famous flitch of bacon. So much, this week, for the affectionate remembrances of my

friends.-R.O.

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

[ocr errors]

THE

FLEET PAPERS.

LONDON: PUBLISHED BY

JOHN PAVEY, 47, HOLYWELL STREET, STRAND,

AND

BENJAMIN STEILL, 20, PATERNOSTER ROW.

THESE Papers are principally intended for the perusal of the friends of Christianity and the Constitution; particularly the Clergy and the Aristocracy, and of all persons who are possessed of Property. The object of the writer will be to explain the reason for the present alarming state of English society, and the consequent insecurity of life and property; also, to offer some remarks upon the folly and wickedness of attempting to uphold our Institutions, particularly that of Private Property, by the unconstitutional means of Centralization, Commissioning, Espionage, and Force; finally, to state his own views on the best mode of restoring Peace, Contentment, Security, and Prosperity, to every rank of the people of England.

The author is perfectly aware of the fact, that every Parliamentary leader is now only attempting to legislate for the present moment-putting off the evil day -making laws" from hand to mouth," in the hope that some unforeseen, fortunate event may enable succeeding Statesmen to legislate for permanency. He is also convinced that there is a mode of successfully re-establishing our Institutions upon their original foundation-Christianity;-and that that is the only way to preserve them from the encroachments of political partisans, who are now paving the way to universal Ruin, Anarchy, and Despotism.

NOTICES TO CORRESPONDENTS.

Mr. Oastler is "At Home" on Tuesdays, Thurdays, and Saturdays.—Mr. Oastler's health
requires that he should entirely refrain from receiving the visits of his friends on Mondays,
Wednesdays, and Fridays.
WILLIAM DODD, the Factory Cripple, returns thanks to E. Ashworth, Esq., Turton, near
Bolton, for 5s.

William Dodd's Letter next week.

VOLUME FIRST

OF

THE FLEET PAPERS
May be had of the Publishers, in

FIFTY-TWO NUMBERS, AT 2d. EACH,

OR

THIRTEEN PARTS, AT 9d. EACH.

PAVEY, 47, HOLYWELL STREET, STRAND, AND STEILL, 20, PATERNOSTER ROW.

Mr. PAVEY is supplied with Title-pages, which, on application, will be given to those who wish to bind the volume.

NOTICE OF THE "FLEET PAPERS."

The

THE FLEET PAPERS.-By RICHARD OASTLER. Nos. 45-48. London: Pavey, Holywell Street. Strand.-We class these two works together, [the Fleet Papers and the Journal of the Working Classes,] because the object of them is the same- - the improvement of the condition, and the instruction, on many important points, of the operative portion of society. FLEET PAPERS, and their benevolent, ill-requited author, have often received from us the meed of praise which is due no less to the numbers now before us than to their predecessors. The same kindly spirit, the same nervous mind, the same stern integrity, breathe throughout; and we can only regret, that the possessor of these sterling virtues is in a prison. . . In one of these papers, we find the following remarks on the interview between Sir Robert Peel and a deputation of the working classes. The principles of the New Poor Law are discussed with masterly acumen in these pages, and it is clearly proved, that the intention of our late liberal governors, in passing that law, was to accustom the people of England to a coarser kind of food!!"- The Hull Packet, Dec. 10, 1841.

To Mr. Richard Oastler,

EMIGRATION.

"London, Dec. 14th, 1841.

.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"SIR.I rejoice to find. from your reply to your Huddersfield correspondent, J. H.. that you will defend the poor and needy' from this new monster that has just come forth to devour them:-the Emigration Kidnapper.' To little purpose will you rescue them from the jaws of the Factory Monster' and the Poor Law Monster,' if the 'Emigration Monster' be suffered to devour them. Unless the emigration monster' be firmly and boldly resisted, my firm conviction is, that he will be found more cruel and rapacious, more insatiable of human blood, than either the Factory Monster or the Poor Law Monster. The Emigration Monster, like the Factory and Poor Law Monsters, is essentially a lover of Mammon,' aud like every other lover of Mammon, his object is to ravish the poor,' to make merchandise' of them, to suck out of them no small advantage. As, Sir, the Factory Monster works up' poor little children in its accursed mills (Hells,' the late Mr. Cobbett used, not inaptly, to call them), so would the Emigration Monster work up,' unless prevented, our British agriculturists and artizans in the swamps and forests of our colonies. Every humane man like yourself, should keep a strict eye upon the lovers of Mammon,' and narrowly watch their designs. They are naturally hard-hearted, cruel, and rapacious; and would eat up the people as they would eat bread.' Woe betide those who fall into their hands. The inmates of the Fleet Prison well know the hard-heartedness and cruelty of the 'lovers of Mammon;' and must surely feel anxious to preserve the poor and needy' from becoming their prey. That you will do everything in your power to keep them out of the net of the spoiler,' is what I feel assured of. To keep them out of the net of the Emigration Monster,' all you need do will be to make the people well acquainted with the infamous tricks practised on the poor emigrants' with the dreadful hardships they are exposed to on shipboard; with their sufferings and privations when they arrived at the end of their voyage; and above all, to inform them of the thousands and tens of thousands who have lost their lives by the burning and foundering of emigrant ships, and by their being wrecked.

[ocr errors]

"Allow me to conclude, by expressing the happiness I feel, that a man like yourself should have come forward so boldly and zealously in the cause of the poor; and still more happy when I consider that in all your efforts in their behalf, you are guided by the light of the Gospel.

"I am, Sir, faithfully yours,

"W. MORRIS."

LETTER VI.

ON COMMERCIAL ECONOMY.

"To J. R. MCULLOCH, Esq.,

"SIR,-The branch of the science of commercial economy, to which I alluded in my last letter, was that of the effect produced on the circumstances of a country by absentee expenditure. With regard to this important question, I will again call your attention to the fact that an advocate of the free principle of trade' is necessarily obliged to argue that absentee expenditure is good for a country, or enriches it, because, if free trade is good, this also must be good, for it is one and the same thing.

"I have already remarked, that the conclusion thus drawn by you, and other advocates of free trade, has excited much distrust respecting the whole course of argument on which it is professed to be founded, because the conclusion itself is contrary to common experience, for instead of being beneficial to a country, or enriching it, the reverse effect is clearly seen to result from it.

"In your work, entitled 'Principles of Political Economy,' to which I have before had occasion to refer. under the head of Commerce, you endeavour to show that the community would sustain no injury by the total abolition of the prohibitive system, because whatever commodities are imported from abroad must be paid for, directly or indirectly, by articles of British manufacture, consequently there would be the same employment for British labour as before, the whole of your argument being embodied in the single word because.' Having laid this great question to rest in that easy and summary manner which it is your general custom to employ, and which seems to give to your own mind entire satisfaction, though to the minds of those who look for strict reasoning, it is just the reverse, you then take up the question of absentee expenditure, and by connecting it with the preceding course of argument which I have just noticed, you assume to dispose of it in the same way, making it a corollary. The passage occurs at page 156, and is as follows;

"What has now been stated GOES FAR to settle the disputed question as to the influence of absentee expenditure. Ir an English gentleman, living at home, and using none but foreign articles in his establishment, gives the same encouragement to industry that he would do were he to use none but British articles, he must, it is obvious, do the same thing should he go abroad. Whatever he may get from the foreigner, when at Paris or Brussels, must be paid for. directly or indirectly, in British articles, quite the same way as when he resided in London. Nor is it easy to imagine any grounds for pronouncing his expenditure in the latter more beneficial to this country than in the former.'

66

[ocr errors]

The first comment which I shall make on this passage, shall be, on the important meaning of two words near the commencement. You say, the evidence adduced goes far to settle. Here, then, you admit that the evidence is not complete or perfect. It only goes far. The question then is, how far? At this point of your subject, you were imperatively called upon to attempt to give a definition, instead of this you have evaded the whole question in the weak manner which I have just noticed.

"Again, you say, 'If an English gentleman,' &c, &c. Here you rest your conclusion upon certain premises which you require to be granted to you, that is, if what you have before advanced be true, then this issue must be true also. If I grant you a false hypothesis, I know very well I am bound to grant you also a false induction, and likewise a false conclusion. This is a very ingenious method of making use of logic; but it is a very bad way to treat a serious subject. I maintain, that the premises which you have here assumed, as the basis of your argument, are wholly false; and, moreover, I maintain that the terms which you have employed, prove that you were well acquainted with the unsoundness of these premises, or, else that your mind was incapable of grasping the whole of the argument on which you had ventured.

"Again, in the same page there occurs the following passage;—

"I do not mean, by anything now stated, nor did I mean, by anything I have stated on other occasions, to maintain that absenteeism may not be, in several respects, injurious, It would be easy, indeed, to show that both England and Scotland have been largely benefitted by the residence of the great landed proprietors on their estates, No one can doubt that they have been highly instrumental in introducing the manners, and in diffusing a taste for the conveniences and enjoyments of a more refined society; and that the improved communications between different places, the expensive and commodious farm-buildings, and the plantations with which the country is sheltered and ornamented, are to be, in a great degree, ascribed to their residence. It may be doubted, however, considering the circumstances under which most Irish landlords acquired their estates, the difference between their religious tenets and those of their tenants, the peculiar tenures under which the latter hold their lands, and the political condition of their country, whether their residence would have been of any considerable advantage. But, whatever conclusion may be come to as to this point, cannot affect what has been stated in the text. The question really at issue refers merely to the spending of revenue, and has nothing to do with the improvement of estates; and, notwithstanding all that has been said to the contrary, I am not yet convinced that absenteeism is, in this respect, at all injurious.'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Now, the long paragraph just quoted, is of a very odd character, and every careful reader will perceive that the design of it is merely that of creating confusion, and thereby diverting attention from the great principle which the inquiry involves. You have here heaped together many most extensive additional questions, such as, The manners and tastes of refined society, The circumstances under which inost Irish landlords acquired their estates, The difference between their religious tenets and those of their tenants,’—The peculiar tenures under which the latter hold their lands,' and 'The political condition of the country.' I feel myself justified in expressing my conviction, that before commencing the discussion, you had adopted the determination of supporting, at all hazards, the Free Trade principle. In the course of your investigations, the im portant question of Absentee Expenditure, as well as others, arose, and you felt the impediment which they presented to your progress, and being incapable of treating them fully and honestly, you attempted to overwhelm the true nature of the argument by the introduction of irrelevant matter, hoping thereby to throw the minds of your readers into the same hopeless state of confusion as that in which you found your own.

[ocr errors]

There is one part of the paragraph, however, which IS essential, and which bears upon the point. It is this,- The question really at issue refers merely to the spending of revenue, and has nothing to do with the improvement of estates; and notwithstanding all that has been said to the contrary, I am not yet convinced that absenteeism is, in this respect, at all injurious.' So then, Sir, you admit that so much evidence has been adduced respecting the injurious nature of absentee expenditure, that you are only not yet convinced that it is injurious. The true nature of your adinission here is, that the greater weight of evidence is against the Free Trade principle, but not

« ÎnapoiContinuă »