But why need we multiply instances. Let us then pass to say a word or two about what railways have done for the humbler part of our population. Have they not attained facilities for their pursuits as well as for their enjoyments that were not dreamt of thirty,—twenty years ago? How prosperous the working classes now are; their labour is at a premium, and in demand such as it has never before experienced. They have never been remunerated so handsomely, and they have earned their pay with shorter hours, better ventilation, better food and more of it, than they ever had before. Unions and combinations, however deplorable in their course of action, at all events, are signs and manifestations of power;[61] and, now-a-days, we find combinations and strikes extended even to agricultural labourers. Why? Because they know—stupid, heavy, unintelligent, and unenlightened though they may be—that, thanks to the railway, they can get at least as good employment elsewhere as in their own villages and hamlets. The farmer knows—feels—and, farmer-like, grumbles at this, but he also knows, that, thanks to free trade, and thanks to cheap railway conveyance, he is enabled to obtain, in the first instance, the highest possible fertilisation for his land, and, in the second, when his crops are gathered, that he can dispose of them, notwithstanding immense cereal and other eatable imports, in markets far distant, and at prices which not only leave him nothing to complain of, but much to be satisfied with. We no longer hear the old party cries, “Protection to native industry,” and such like. The modern cultivator does not require the protection which the old law gave him. He finds he can protect himself in a far better manner without it. Material prosperity is spread broad-cast over the land. It is true we have recently had a financial crash, and a financial crisis; but we have had no crush, nor are we going to have one. It is also true that our exports for the first six months of this year are, as a consequence of somewhat diminished trade, less than they were in the corresponding period of 1866. But, how much are they less? Not 7 per cent. of their gross aggregate. They are, however, 3 per cent. better than they were for the like time one year previously; and, note also, that they are in those six months, £2,000,000 more than they were in the whole _twelve_ months of fifteen years ago.