Hide Articles List

21 articles on this Page






[No title]




RADICALISM IN EDDISBURY. -+- THE NEW CANDIDATE AT TATTENHALL. The newly-adopted Radical candidate for the Eddisbury division (the Hon. A. Stanley), accom- panied by his political sponsor (Mr. James Tomkinson, M.P.), on Monday evening opened his campaign in the Barbour Institute, Tattenhall. Mr. George Cooke presided, and the audience, in which there was a good sprinkling of Unionists, included Mr. Robert Barbour, Messrs. T. Moore Dutton, Morgan (Maipas), J. Lightfoot, etc. The Chairman remarked that that was the first political meeting which had been held in that beautiful hall, a hall which was a part of a build- ing that was a standing memorial to the generosity and thoughtfulness oi the donors. That was also the first public political meeting which had been addressed by the Hon. Arthur Stanley in con- nection with that campaign, and they were some- what honoured in latteiihalli by having Mr. Stanley there for the first meeting he was address- ing. (Hear, hear.) That was the first time the Liberal party in the division of Eddisbury had been the first with their candidate, and he hoped that was a good augury that when the declaration of the poll was made the name of the Liberal candidate would be read out first. (Applause.) Mr. Stanley said the Liberal programme con- sisted of construction and destruction to a certain extent, always with the proviso that they were to re-construct where they had destroyed. Taking first the constructive part of the programme, he dealt with the question of the land, remarking that the position of farmers and labourers was not what the Liberal party wished it to be. Thoy wished to enable farmers to have some greater security of tenure on their farms. They did not wish them to be turned out at the whim of an absentee landlord. He believed that in Eddisbury their landlords were very good and generous, but that v vas not the case everywhere. It was the duty of the Liberal party to make some provision for the compensation of a farmer who was evicted by his landlord through no fault of his own. Com- pensation should be calculated on a more gener)us basis thai at present. There should be compensa- tion not only for the absolute benefit of the laud but for the money put into the land, and it should be made easier for a farmer to acquire land in freehold. The rnethdds of land transfer should be simplified. and, there should be some simple form of registration of title. Then there was the agricultural labourer. There was not much enjoy- ment in his life, and it was their duty to make that life a little happier, a little brighter, and a little mor3 interesting to him. He advocated some scheme by which county councils or distuot councils could acquire land to build good, sanita.-y cottages, and attached to the cottages should be plots of land of two or three acres, which should be let to labourers at reasonable rent. Pa.W'ig to the subject of temperance, ho said he believed intemperance could be very much altered by judicious legislation. The temperance policy of the Liberal party was constructive. They lietr.i a good deal of compensation. He was opposed to compensation out of the public fund". He 'd. mitted that in certain cases there was a hardship on the publican who had conducted his house well and soberly, and whose licence was taken away from him by the magistrates because there were too many in the district. His remedy was that compensation in a case of that kind should come cut of the pockets of the brewers and publican:* who owned the other houses in that district. Alluding to popular control. asked them not t.o be led away by the cry that the Liberals wanted | to deprive the poor man of his beer. They did not. They wanted to help the unfortunate man who was dragged down by the evil public-house. The Liberal party were not faddists; they not unreasonable (Hear, hear.) With regard to education, the Act passed in 1902 must be destroyed before the Liberal party could start con- 10 struction. (Applause.) He objected to the Educa- tion Act among other reasons because it abolished school boardon which the farmer and agricul- tural labourer could sit. At the present time the Education Committee met at Crewe or Chester; it was a committee of the County Council, which was not elected primarily for the purpose of educa- tion, and it was impossible for a working-man to serve on that committee. The work was relegated to the rich and idle classes. Another objection that Nonoonformufc teachers could not rise to the kighest position in their educational career. More- over, the principle that taxation and repret.erita- tion should go hand in hand had been violated by this Act. (Applause.) He advocated the taxation 1 of land value., and a reform whereby people. could be put on the dcctorallist much sooner than at present. lie was in favour of one man one vote. (App!ai!e) With regard to the House cf Lords, he vv.t not a one-Chamber man, but he did not like, no good citizen liked, to see one Chamber of the Government of this country a hereditary committee of the Tory party. (Ap- plause.) Referring to Mr. Chamberlain's Fiscal proposal. h? contended that while they would benefit a few, they would not benefit all producers, and he objected to taking out of the pockeL cf 500 to give to 200. Another objection he had that Protection would lead to the corruption of the Hon e of Commons, as it had led to corrup(~o:>. in the United states, and would lead to the forma- tion of tin:,I: Mr. Chamberlain's scheme war. no remedy for trade depression. Thev ill Cheshire were a Hairy farming. community"; they made cheese, they raised milk for the various town* round about, and for dairy farming they needed cheap feeding material, cheap agricultural imnlc. ment. and cheap food for their employes. JVIi. Chamberlain's nchcrne would make all these three thins-, more c.>.p-n-Hva. What would he give thorn in return? It was a sordid argument. and not one that he (the speaker) liked. Mr. Chamberlain would put a tax on American cheese, but he said he wouM pKempt their chief rival. Canada, fro r. the tax, and (he result would be that they would be worse off than over; their expenses would be higher, and. instead of leaving a fair field, they would l;;tve C'tnada coming in on cheaper term-, than the rest of the world. Mr. Chamberla;n's proposals would benefit to a certain extent the landlords, who were pretty well off as it was, and would benefit the manufacturers of the particular E-oods which were protected. Supposing under Mr. Chamberlain' scheme tHe price of agricultural produce wore raised, in the long run the benefit would iro into the pocket of the landlord, and his pocket only. (f farmers got more money out of the land thev would have to pay a better price for the land. He believed this Protection was a mere bogey raised by Mr. Chamberlain to cover the misdeed; of the Government. (Applause.) Mr. James Tomkinson also spoke on the Fiscal question, and finally, on the proposition of Mr. Morgan (Malpas), a vote of thanks was accorded the chairman and speakers.





[No title]





MILK SUPPLY. -_..----