Page:History of the Anti corn law league.pdf/383

Rh two hours, Sir James remarked, in a manner more premonitory than he had any right to assume, even from his high office, that if any serious outbreak were to take place, in one week all the institutions of the country would be broken down, the rights of property sacrificed, and the labouring classes would be the greatest sufferers. Mr. Ashworth said that should such a disaster occur the sound portion of the community might be relied upon, and though the country might endure a severe ordeal, its industrial freedom would eventually be established. Sir J. Graham's fear and Mr. Ashworth's hope were both to be realized.

The deputation proceeded to wait on Lord Ripon and Mr. Gladstone at the Board of Trade. Lord Ripon, allusion having been made to the United States, said that the Americans themselves had a law against the admission of Canadian wheat. "Yes," said Mr. Bright; "and the carriers of that measure quoted our example as a precedent." His lordship declined to discuss the question at length. Mr. Gladstone asked if there was no symptom of improvement in trade, and was told that the distress, so far from being alleviated, was greatly aggravated; and so the conference ended.

It was obvious from these and other indications, that ministers were anxious to have the daily sitting Parliament on the other side Palace Yard soon dissolved. A good harvest, and some revival of trade might possibly stave off demands which were troublesome. But the members of the House of Commons were not allowed to separate without a reiteration of claims on their justice, and further tests of their faithfulness to their trust. On Thursday, 21st of July, Mr. Duncombe moved an address to her Majesty, praying that Parliament should be re-assembled with a view of an alteration of the commerce in corn, if no improvement should take place after the prorogation. He was ably supported by Mr. Brotherton, Mr. Mark Philips, Mr. Cobden, and Mr. T. M. Gibson. On the