Page:History of the Anti corn law league.pdf/28

The opportunity soon occurred, for on Thursday, August 2nd, Mr. Loyd appeared on a platform on the Clarendon Inn bowling green, in Chorlton-upon-Medlock, to address the electors of that township. His speech was as vague as that which he had delivered in the Exchange, and like that had a tone of liberalism about it which made it acceptable to the greater number of his hearers, consisting almost entirely of electors; and it required some moral courage to attempt to show the hollowness of the professions which the audience had recognised as being made in good faith. As the election for one of the representatives of Manchester turned upon the cross-examination which he underwent at the close of his speech, I copy some of the questions and answers from my paper at the time:—

Mr. Prentice: Mr. Loyd has said that the duty on the importation of corn ought to be no more than to repay the agriculturist for the peculiar taxes he pays. Does Mr. Loyd mean to say that the agricultural is taxed more than the trading community, and therefore entitled to peculiar protection? Mr. Loyd: The agriculturists contend that they do, and they are entitled to he heard, and it will be my duty to give the subject a fair and due consideration. (Cries of Oh! Oh!)—Mr. P.: Then am I to understand that Mr. Loyd in speaking of protection, has been expressing not his own opinions but those of the agriculturists? This question was not answered, Mr. Loyd's friends clustering round him, and assuring him it was one which he was not called upon to answer.—Mr. P.:Will Mr. Loyd say at what period in the progress of the Reform Bill he became convinced that it ought to be supported, and when he would have supported it had he been in the House of Commons? Mr. L.: I cordially assent to the great principles of the Bill—disfranchisement and enfranchisement, and would have given them my support.—Mr. P.:Mr. Loyd has not said when—I ask him then to say if he would have supported the second reading? Mr. L.:I think the question has already received a sufficient answer. (Loud disapprobation, mixed with faint cheers from the hustings.) Mr. P.: I repeat my question. Would Mr. Loyd have voted for the second reading of that Bill by which Manchester was enfranchised? Mr. L.: I was always in favour of Manchester being represented. (A storm of disapprobation, and cries of " answer the question.")—Mr. P.:I will again repeat the question. Would Mr. Loyd have voted for the second reading of the Reform Bill? And will