But the most remarkable part of Lord Salisbury's speech at
Dumfries was the emphatic condemnation of Sir Robert Peel's Free-trade policy,—not that he condemned Sir Robert Peel,—which it contained. If we understand Lord Salis- bury aright, he would not even have repealed the Corn Laws in 1846 until he had extorted from foreign Powers- eli;ch of them he does not-specify, nor bow long in that moment of supreme agony he would have had the country wait,—equiva- lent concessions to English trade. "That the result of this one-sided Free-trade policy has been unfortunate, I for one can- not doubt. It puts us in the position that, though we gain by the free importation of corn and other materials, so that the prices of them are low to the consumers, we do not gain all that we might have gained. We do not gain an issue for the in- dustry of our own community and for the exportation of goods that we produce. We do not gain an issue for those industries, and, therefore, those industries languish." Lord Salisbury thinks apparently that it would have been better to starve a good deal longer, in order to tempt other countries to be as wise as we were willing to be, if they would only follow snit. How long we were to starve, and how many Reciprocity Treaties we were to gain before leaving-off starving, Lord Salis- bury did not explain. The Dumfries people did not receive Lord Salisbury well. There was a small riot in the town after his speech: windows were broken, and sonic of the Con- servative guests had to escape as best they could. This violence is very bad ; but it is, at least, an answer to the foolish sneers of the Conservatives at the mild temper of the Liberal demon- strations.
Previous page
