foundry masthead





 EBENEZER ELLIOTT
(1781 - 1849)


Elliott writes in 1834 to Robert Owen  


This very long letter to Robert Owen appeared in The Sheffield Independent on 8th Feb 1834. It was sent to the newspaper as a cry of indignation after Owen published some papers which clearly riled Elliott. As Owen was a national celebrity, the discovery of this letter makes a interesting addition to the study of the Corn Law Rhymer & his role.

Robert Owen (1771-1858) was a Welshman who was one of the founders of socialism & the co-operative movement. He became a wealthy man through investing in Manchester textile mills & then buying factories in Lanarkshire, Scotland. Here he put to practise some visionary ideas: his workers should have good conditions at work, better standards of living at home & a pleasanter environment. This novel approach led to great gains in productivity.  Pleased with his success in Scotland, he set up in the USA a model village community called New Harmony, though this soon failed.

 

Owen  was a rich philanthropist who spent much time fighting for the poor, yet he was an inspirational figure who met royalty & the leaders of nations. His ideals & vision were very influential.  He summarised his ideas in his book "New View of Society,"  which was published in 1813.

 


To Robert Owen, ESQ.
 
Dear Sir,  -  In your reply to our memorial, you have not shown how you could (unless trade were universally free) either begin to work your system without immediate loss, or continue to work it without ultimate ruin; by ruin I mean the destruction of all the funds embarked in the experiment. Neither have you attempted to refute any one of our arguments.  You merely repeat your former assertion that our misery is prolonged, if not caused, by competition. 
 
Now, we believe and feel, that competition exists by a law of God, as certainly as the planets are kept in their courses by another of his laws.  We know not what might happen, if you or the landowners could dethrone or destroy the Almighty; but we know too well what happens when short-sighted men attempt to subvert his laws, as our landowners have been doing for eighteen years; and we fearlessly assert, that our miseries are not caused or prolonged by competition, but, verily, by that uncompetitive system which you advocate, and which, for nearly a quarter of a century, has been in full and fateful operation here.  If you will open your eyes, you will see the unholy consequences of that system all around you.  -  It has already, as you and your advocates acknowledge, converted the steam-engine itself into a curse; but, believe me,  Sir, there are other nations, who will not only adopt the steam-engine, but take good care that it shall not be a curse to them. 
 
THE AGRICULTURISTS OF ENGLAND HAVE NO COMPETITORS;  and our competing cotton spinners are wretched, because our wretched though uncompeting agriculturists, ignorant of their true interests, have not yet learned to kick the backsides of their oppressors, and teach them, at once, common honesty and common sense. 
 
I know a farmer who gained five shillings net profit per acre by his farm in 1793, when his rent was ten shillings per acre, and the duty on imported wheat sixpence per quarter.  The produce of his land sells for no more now than it did then, (not quite so much,) but his rent is doubled, and his taxes are increased; consequently he loses, at least, five shillings per acre by farming, and has his family to keep out of his capital.  Yet he is one of those men whom sagacious Nimrod delighteth to set astride on a military saddle, with two horse pistols in it!  What further proof can you require of the evil tendency of the uncompetitive system, than its present consequences?  And what are they?  National robbery, national beggary, almost national despair.  The final result will too probably be national bankruptcy, the gratuitous subversion of the state; or, perhaps, the subjugation of this country by a foreign power  -  if it be true, as Machiavel asserted centuries ago, that no fully peopled country can long maintain its independence, unless it utterly untax its commercial capital, industry, and skill.
 
     If you would know more particularly what have been and are, the blessed results of your uncompetitive system, read a pamphlet by William Ibbotson, of this neighbourhood, farmer, entitled "Thoughts on the Corn Laws; proving that they impoverish farmers, by beggaring tradesmen; and, without raising the price of corn here, lower it abroad!"  and, of course, give our trade to foreigners.  Or inquire of Mr. Woollen, of Rivilin Mills, near Sheffield, who will shew you from his books, that in  1790 and 1793, he got rather more for his flour than he now gets.  If you will then come to me, I will shew you, that corn was then at the same price at Hull as at Hamburgh, and that is now one-third cheaper at Hamburgh than at Hull!  How can our farmers live; with double rents, and manufacturing rivals at half price, destroying their only customers?  Unless the price of bread be equalised throughout Europe, by a speedy and utter abolition of our corn-laws, will not capital inevitably quit this country, and go where bread is cheapest?  You may answer, that Mr. Fielden's mills will not take wing, and fly across the channel.  True, they will not, because they cannot, but other capital can, and will, because it must; other mills will be erected elsewhere; and Mr. Fielden's mills, overgrown with moss and weeds, will remain  -  magnificent, but mournful, monuments of the wisdom of land-jobbing legislation, and the uncompetitive system in all its glory!   Give us free and fair competition, and we shall  soon have neither poor laws, nor debt; neither tread-mills, nor trades' unions, neither palaced beggars, nor victims of palaced robbers. 
 
Is it not enough that the consequences of the blessed uncompetitive system are already seen and felt too plainly, in the slow, silent agonies, the sunken eyes, the downcast looks, the broken hearts of British misery and unavailing toil?  Would you have them written in blood and fire over every foot of land between John o' Groats and Penzance?  No, we believe you would not.  -  We do not yet suspect you of such cruelty.  But we do suspect that you are the poet, and that the Corn-Law Rhymer is the proser.  Unhappily for you, the common sense of mankind has outgrown the cradle, and all its lullabies.  -  Write prose, write prose.  Any prose is better than bad blank verse. 
 
Your excellent grandsire, perhaps believed in Jack the Giant Killer; and perhaps the good old man has a descendant, whose poetical philosophy is even more romantic than the feats of giant-killing Jack; but, depend on it, Sir, the stern eyes around us, glaring with famine, and rage, and despair, are not to be meekened by tales from the nursery, or which the nursery would pity, or despise.  Do not suspect us of wishing to speak scornfully.  Perhaps we, Sheffielders, breathing a thick atmosphere, are too dull to understand your meaning.  -  Or perhaps, you were merely quizzing us when you wrote your reply, and, in reality, did not intend to express any meaning whatever.  If there is any meaning at all in it, we think you might have conveyed it to us without wasting so many words, good in themselves.  We should be sorry to suppose that your wisdom is like that of the philosophic sage, who got rid of his sixpence by passing it between two halfpence. 
 
We assure you we have carefully read your papers, although, like all your compositions, and those of your advocates, they want brevity.  It is in vain, however, that you, or they, tell us through a cloud of syllables, how productive are the powers of the soil, and what virtue there is in potatoes!  Our friends, the Whigs, or Tories, with whom we do not yet class you, have told us all that a thousand times.  We believe there is a spirit in potatoes, perhaps brandy; but would it pay for distillation?  The true meaning of the advice you give us, whether you know your own meaning or not, really is neither less nor more than what we should voluntarily, and by agreement, come, down to the lowest food that will support life.  The Trades' Unions, if they are wise, will prevent this catastrophe; consequently they will not be wise if they follow your advice.  There is nothing at the end of your system but potatoes; there is nothing else; unless, by giving our trade away to foreigners, you can make chaff and chopped straw desirable articles of food for man in this country.  YOU CANNOT, FOR YOU SHALL NOT !  -  The Charles Street gang, whatever they may think, and however they may try to hide their stratagems, will find no allies among their victims, except such as Sampson found when he brought down the roof of the temple on himself and his enemies.
 
I thank you for the two opportunities you have given me of striking two fresh blows at the all-beggaring bread tax.  I hope you will furnish me with many more such opportunities.  Tap, tap, tap, will go, at last, through the HEART OF STONE.  I do not think you are quite a Napoleon; but you will remember that there was a person so called, and that on the sixteenth day of June, 1815, near a village called Waterloo, he went whithersoever he was ordered to go by a man immeasurably inferior to himself.  First he knocked his head against Hougemont, then he knocked it against La Haye Saint, and lastly, (and still obeying the sergeant,) he rushed madly up a slope,
 
that he might have the infinite satisfaction of scampering  down again, with a ringing in his ears not exactly like the kick of a jackass.                                                          I am dear Sir, your's, very truly,
                                                                                       EBENEZER ELLIOTT

Elliott's newly discovered letter is interesting on a number of accounts:-

1/    Somehow, the poet's letter does not read like a personal letter - it's more like an open letter to the citizens of Sheffield.  If the letter had been sent to Owen, the opening paragraph would have been more conventional: maybe more flowery or more thoughtfully polite.  It is most likely that Elliott was trying to promote his own ideas on competition to local people & to warn them about the evils of Owen's system.  The length of the letter supports this view: Elliott was simply dishing out propaganda - his "letter" was almost a pamphlet! It seems very unlikely that Elliott ever posted his letter to Owen.

2/    While the letter refers to "your reply,"  it also mentions " we have carefully read your papers." It is likely that the response Owen made was through the pages of a journal or newspaper. Certainly the Robert Owen archives show no trace of correspondence between the two men.

3/    Of course, the Poet of the Poor was a fervent believer in competition (it was "a law of God," after all) and therefore he had no space whatsoever for opposing views.  Naturally he was enraged to see Owen blaming competition as the cause of "our misery."  While Owen's "uncompetitive system" would inevitably lead to the nation's ruin. Thus the reason behind Elliott's letter was to shoot down Owen's system and to laud competition which would make a huge difference to everyone.

4/    The Corn Law Rhymer supported his argument with facts & figures, so his response to Owen was not wholy an emotional one, but what really stands out in the letter is Elliott's eloquence and his exaggeration. He writes of stern eyes, for instance, "glaring with famine" and he refers to Owen laying down the law "through a cloud of syllables."  Good stuff from the bard!  We also see the poet going over the top with his description of the consequences of Owen's system as "national robbery" and "national beggary" which would bring "national bankruptcy" together with invasion from abroad. Note, too, Elliott's use of repetition; something which he uses very well in his speeches: so perhaps there's a sense of performance in his letter, too.

5/    Another feature of the letter is Elliott's sarcasm.  Perhaps Owen's grandfather believed in fairy tales, but Owen should not be telling such tales to the people of Sheffield!  Or possibly the mighty Owen thinks local people too dim to understand  the famous man? The poet then slams Owen for lacking any real sense in his attempt at communicating his ideas; which is a little insulting.

6/    Although Elliott does make the odd conciliatory remark, the general tone of Elliott's letter is contempt for Owen & his theories. That was always Elliott's position - fearless rhetoric. There was no middle way for the Corn Law Rhymer.




This letter was collected by Diane Gascoyne, an Elliott enthusiast.


Further information

    Late in 1833, Robert Owen gave a lecture in Sheffield on his ideas for a National Society. His speech led in January 1834 to the founding of the Sheffield Regeneration Society which Elliott refused to join since he detested anything which he thought smacked of communism. Shortly after Owen's lecture, Elliott wrote a letter to the editor of a London newspaper. The letter appeared in the Morning Chronicle for 19th January 1834; in it, Elliott declared that Owen was "honest but wrong." He urged the editor to publish his letter to make Owen reply to "our Memorial."  Elliott then remarked that "I resolved to be a member of his committee that I might convert him or counteract him." Presumably, Elliott went on to change his mind about actually joining the society, as has already been seen. (Elliott's letter to the Morning Chronicle was not the same as the letter which appears above).

    A London journal, The Examiner, then published on Sunday January 26th 1834 an article which included an extract of a letter from Elliott and members of the Sheffield Regeneration Society to Robert Owen, the founder of the society.

    On Tuesday January 28th 1834, The Belfast News-Letter contained an article: "The Regenerative System: Mr Owen and Operatives of Sheffield." This quoted the letter of January 26th & discussed it.

    Elliott's opposition to Regeneration Societies provoked much critical newspaper coverage, particularly in the Manchester and Salford Advertisor. This prompted the Corn Law Rhymer to write two letters which appeared in the newspaper on the 2nd & 11th February 1834.


To return to Ebenezer Research Foundry, please strike the anvil