eduction of import duties. He was there, he said,
"not only as one of the representatives of the city of Durham, but also as
one of the representatives of that benevolent organization, the Anti-Corn
Law League." A member who heard the speech described Bright as "about the
middle size, rather firmly and squarely built, with a fair, clear
complexion, and an intelligent and pleasing expression of countenance. His
voice is good, his enunciation distinct, and his delivery free from any
unpleasant peculiarity or mannerism." He wore the usual Friend's coat, and
was regarded with much interest and hostile curiosity on both sides of the
House.

Mr Ewart's motion was defeated, but the movement of which Cobden and Bright
were the leaders continued to spread. In the autumn the League resolved to
raise L100,000; an appeal was made to the agricultural interest by great
meetings in the farming counties, and in November _The Times_ startled the
world by declaring, in a leading article, "The League is a great fact. It
would be foolish, nay, rash, to deny its importance." In London great
meetings were held in Covent Garden theatre, at which William Johnson Fox
was the chief orator, but Bright and Cobden were the leaders of the
movement. Bright publicly deprecated the popular tendency to regard Cobden
and himself as the chief movers in the agitation, and Cobden told a
Rochdale audience that he always stipulated that he should speak first, and
Bright should follow. His "more stately genius," as Mr John Morley calls
it, was already making him the undisputed master of the feelings of his
audiences. In the House of Commons his progress was slower. Cobden's
argumentative speeches were regarded more sympathetically than Bright's
more rhetorical appeals, and in a debate on Villiers's annual motion
against the Corn Laws Bright was heard with so much impatience that [v.04
p.0568] he was obliged to sit down. In the next session (1845) he moved for
an inquiry into the operation of the Game Laws. At a meeting of county
members earlier in the day Peel had advised them not to be led into
discussion by a violent speech from the member for Durham, but to let the
committee be granted without debate. Bright was not violent, and Cobden
said that he did his work admirably, and won golden opinions from all men.
The speech established his position in the House of Commons. In this
session Bright and Cobden came into opposition, Cobden voting for the
Maynooth Gra