The Sun. — London, England, 1846-02-28 00:00:00

The LORD ADVOCATE presented a petition from Lanarkshire to the same effect. FROST, WILLIAAIS, AND JONES. Mr. FERRAND presented two petitions from Keathley and Knaresborough, praying for the liberation of Frost, Williams, and Jones. Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE moved that the petition of William Scott, chairman cf a public riveting of the inhabitants of Dundee, complaining of the illegal treatment and imprison ment of six factory girls (presented last night), be printed with the votes,—Agreed to. THE CASE OF BRIAN SEERY. Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL said he had been accused by a morning paper of having given notice of a motion mid then withdrawn it, because he was ashamed to persist in it. Now the truth was, that he had never done anything in that House of which he had reason to be ashamed. He did not withdraw his motion for any such reason as had been imputed to him by the paper in question. The facts of the case were these : He had given notice of a motion to obtain the names of the people who had composed that deputation. In the course of that notice he had made use of a very strong expression, to which his attention had been recently drawn, and he believed that in the us.. of chat term he had, to a certain extent, com mitted a breach of the rules of the House. lit deeply regrettel the use of the expression on that account, :ma 1,1 - thought that it was his duty to apologise to the House for this breach of tl.e respect to which the House was entitled. But yet at the same time he was bound o assert that he had been wrongfully accused by the morning papers in question. Sir R. H. INGLIS could not help thinking that the orders of the House had been violated, and that this statement of the Hon. Gentleman was anything but satisfactory, and t hat something more was required of h.m than a mere apology to the House—( Hear, and cheers)—when he limited his regret to the House for the use of such a n exprosion as that of the blood hound deputation, he committed a violence on the intelligence of society at large. The Hoe. Gen tleman had c xpressed regret for the use of this expres sion of the "blood- hound deputatien ;" and he felt it was only consistent that some larger apology should be made. He found with some surprise the expression contained in the votes with w Lich he had been furnished; that the words were clearly out of order was shown by the circumstance of the sheet having been cancelled; and he thought, therefore, that there was something duo to society at large, and he wished that the Hon. Gentleman would only expross his regret with the same frankness to society at large as he had done for Viis breach of the orders of the Hou-e. Mr. J. O'CONNELL—Sir, I have expressed my regret for the use of that expression to the House; but I beg to inform the Honourable Baronet that I used that expression in the discharge of any duty to society at large, and the.ef.:re I feel it unnecessary to suppress it.—(Hear, hear.) Sir R. H. INGLIS—.I think, The SPEAKER—TiIe - hon. Baronet is clearly out of order. Sir R. GLlS—Then there is no help for it.— ( Latutier. ) And thus the subject dropped. PUBLIC WORKS (IRELAND) BILL. This Bill passed through Committee, and was reported. THE MILITIA. On the question that the Hsuse at its rising do adjourn to Monday nest, Mr. R. YORKE wished to a-k the Right Hon. the Seeretary at War when it was the intention of the Government to bring forward any measure respecting the enrollment of the militia ? Mr. S. HERBERT said it was impossible for him to give an answer at present. He would, kowever, do so at as early a period as possible. THE VACANT SEATS ON THE TREASURY BENCH. Colonel SIBTHORP said that, seeing the First Lord of the Treasury in his place, he would put a question to him. Ha would not complain of any want of courtesy, for to that he was perfectly indifferent. He, however, represented a constituency who had sent him to discharge a duty, and on that account he rose to put the question with which he should conclude. He took the liberty last night, seeing the Treasury benches in a situation which he had not seen for twenty years before, and which he hoped he might never see again—(Laughter) — that very important offices remained without their repre sentatives in that Howe, particularly the offices of the Secretary for the Colonies (Mr. Gladstone), and the Secreary for Ireland (the Earl of Lincoln), a most im portant office, when the present condition of Ireland was considered. Not seeing those gentlemen filling any situation in the present session of Parliament—( Great laughter)—he thought it his duty to ask the bight Honourable Baronet (Sir Robeat Peel), whether there was a fair and early opportunity of seeing any of those Hon. Gentlemen, or all of them in their respective situations, to which, how ever, (as we understood) he had received no reply. He now wished to repeat the question—Was there a probability of an opportunity being afforded to Members of that House of wit nessing an early appearance of these gentlemen or any of them in their place in that House—( Continued laughter.)— in order that Honourable Members might be enabled to put important questions to them which came within the province of their department ? (Laughter.) But if the Right Hon. Baronet refused to answer these questions he (Colonel Sihthorp) could not help it ; at any rate he would have the satisfaction of having dis charged his duty to his constituency.—(The Gallant Member sat down amidst roars of laughter from both sides of the House. ) Sir ROBERT PEEL hoped that neither the Gallant Officer or any other Member of the House had any just ground for blaming him for want of courtesy.—(Loud cheers from both sides of the House.) Certain* in replying to any question connected with the public service, he could not charge himself with that want of courtesy which the Gal lant Member seemed to attribute to him.—( Hear. ) But he (Sir Robert Peel) appealed to the House whether the Gallant Officer concluded his speech last night with putting the question which he had just addressed to him—(Cheers and laughter)—or by saying he should put it this evening? He (Sir Robert Peel) protested against Hon. Members snaking long speeches on the question of the adjourn ment of the debate.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") In this he agreed with the Hon. Member for Northamptonshire (Mr. S. O'Brien) who deprecated, as he did, the practice of occu pying the time of the House by irrelevent remarks in putting questions to the Government ; however, it appearedto him (Sir B. Peel) that it was natural to the Gallant Officer to use vituperative language in addressing the House, possibly, perhaps, because he believed his independence was in danger.— (" Hear, hear," from Colonel Sihthorp, and loud laughter.) The Honourable Gentleman said he would ask a question of the Bight Honourable Baronet (Sir R. Peel) —When he ex pected that the vacancies which had ttken place in puliic offices would be filled ut? asd I* was prepared to say that the only office vacant was that of Com missioners of Woods and Forests. There were two other gentlemen, Members of the Treasury, who had signified to him their intention of tendering their resignations ; but those offices were not actually vacant, because these Gentle s-nee in question eensented to hold them until some opportunity offered of filling them up.—( Loud laughter.) He confessed it was a very inconvenient thing to have public officers, requiring seats in that House, withont them.—(Laughter.) But he was sure the public service would not sustain any injury in consequence. The Honourable Gentleman asked him a very unusual question, to say when the Secretary_ of the Lord-Lieutenant in Ireland would be in his place. Nuw he ( Sir Robert Peel) with great respect begged to say that he was not responsible for his absence, and that he thought the Secretary could best answer that question himself. The Gallant Officer complained that the Secretary for the Colo nies was not in the House, and he ( Sir R. Peel) should givehim the same answer as he did respecting the other vacancies, that that Gentleman could best answer why he eves not there. (Renewed laughter.) But this he would say, that one of the main reasons that they were not there was, that he had such a confidence in the wisdom and policy of the measures submitted by her Majesty's Government, and such a confidence in the calm deliberation of that House, that be was content to forego that advantage which in ordinary times the Crown possessed. Mr. FERRAND begged that the kind indulgence of the House would be afforded to him whilst he defended himself from the personal attacks of no less than four Members upon he opposite site of the House, made upon the last night of debate. Had he received any intimation of their intention, he should certaelly have been in his place, but unfortunately a particular engagement had prevented him. He had to thank the Hon. Baronet sitting under him fer his kindness in de defending him against those unmanly attae ks. And he con sidered that the Hon. Memher for Bath should have been the last person in that House who ought to have made use of the following expression —" I am quite sure, if the House intends in any way to command respect, it is not by permitting vulgar vituperation." That Hon. Member threw the Times newspaper upon the floor, and recommended Hon. Members to horses, hip a gentle marfi-who was his superior in every respect. The Hon. Mem ber also asked whether that gentleman was worthy of regard. when he expressed an opinion? He should measure that re mark by the ordinary test applied to the Hon. Member's own profession. Weeiri any person give a guinea, a half guinea, half a crown, or evert half a farthing for the Hon. Member's opinion on a gentleman's conduct ? The public had that value for the opinion of the Hon. and Learned Member, that they would not give the half of a hail-farthing for his opinion, and that was one of the sore points that rankled in his breast. He (Mr. Ferreted) would not continue to allude any further to the Hon. Member, hut would pass on to an attack made upon him by the Hen. Member for Durham, who had spoken to the rffec' that "he would take the liberty of saying that almost every portion of the speech of the Hon. Member for Knaresbereugh, with respect to the meeting of starch manufacturers,was incorrect, as Mr. Wilson never called a mseting of the starch manuf icturers. Mr. Wilson never presided at such a meeting, and such a deputation as he described never waited on Sir Robert Peel." The Hon. Member had put words into his (Mr. Ferrand's) mouth which he never used. He never said that a part of the meeting was formed into a deputation to wait upon' th, Government. What he said was, that the chairman of the Anti-G,En-law League called a meeting of all the starch manu facturers at Manchester, and a resolution was passed at that meeting that a deputation should wait upon the Right lion. Baronet on the subject of the duty on starch. The deputation did go, and now lobsters and starch were the only two things that ha.i the slightest mercy in the tariff. He never said that Mr. Wilson was one of the deputation that waited on the Right Honourable Baron , t, and be would now proceed to justify the statement he made to the House. On the 9th of February, 1843, he received a letter to the following effect :—" I take the liberty of troubling you with a few particulars which will show the sort of disinterested reformers some of the members of the Anti-Corn.law League are; You will, perhaps, take the trouble of satisfying yourself of the correctness of the staternentbefo you makeypublic use of it." He (Mr. Ferrand) did satisfy "7- himself as to the correctness of the statements, and the first he made of the letter was on Tuesday last. writer went on to say that when Sir R. Peel in his new tariff put starch‘rilo took the at Si. per n cwt. after it had been at 91 . per cwt., Mr. c hair at a meeting of the starch manufacturers, forthe purpose of taking o ff the duty on native starch and putting a prohibi tory duty of 2 T 5 per cent. on foreign starch. h succeeded in doubling the duty, as a deputation from the meeting waite on the Board of Trade. The writer concluded by stating that it might be inferred from his letter that he was not a free trader, but the inference would be erroneous—he was a free.. trader, but he did not wish in obtaining his object to associate himself with such free-traders as those he had mentioned. The Samuel Burlington," and dated hi. writer subscribed himself e Feb. 19 , , 1845. In the month of letter from Manche,ter, cember he (Mr. Ferrand) was in tine town of Man chester, :q - id he saw several, gentlemen, whom i.e asked They informed him that if that statement was e . or a re . it was entirely ses d et e ' d that they believed Mr. and d the borough of Stock - Wilson formed part of the ci4c utetion. On the day fol lowing he atten.led a largd Mee g port, where he read this commiftlfeafien, a nd stated that he bad understood Mr. George Wilson for erred part of the depu tation which went to the Government. The Ma zchester Guardian (the paper of the Anti - Corn• law League) attacked, him in a leading article for having made th is statdineui, and denied positively that Mr. G. Wilson had formed tart of the deputation. It, however, admitted that the deputation had waited upon the Government, and did not deny in the slightest degree that Mr. G. Wilson convened the meeting , or that the resolution for sending up the deputation was passed whiie he presided over it. He had that day seen three gentlemen, all of whom were perfectly well acquainted with the circum stances of this matter; they bad seen the statement he made on 'f uesday night, an they assured him it was perfecny cor rect. To that statement, therefore, he was prepared to ad here, and he should not retract one particle of it until the Hon. Member for Durham could convince that House that Mr. G. Wilson did not convene and preside at the meeting which passed the res e l u ti oa appointing the glepttptog. IPHE SUN LONDON,.. SATURDAY MORNING) FEBRUARY 28, MO% . -- - He thought the Honourable Member for Durham e and was the last man to stan d u p in that H attack Hon. Members fur making statements whieh were un founded. Was the Hon. Member aware that within the last few days meetings had been held in Lancashire to rebut state ments he had lately made in that House ?-_and not only to rebut them, but to assert to the world that they were entirely without foundation? He should defend himself in the man ner he had done before, and he hoped he should justify himself before the House, and after imparting to the House certain M- I formation, he should leave it for the House to say whether they could ever afterwarda place any confidence in the statements of the Hon. Member for Durham. He held in his hand an ex • tract from the Bolton Chronicle, which was published by the Hon. and Learned Member opposite. The extract wash headed " Mr. John Bright's Veracity Meeting." He mus ate to the House that the Hon. Member f x Durham, on the intro duction of Lord Ashley's Factory Bill, made certain state ments which reflected on the people of Preston and Rochdale, and these meetings were convened by the people themselves to consider the statements which the Hon. Member had made. The people of Preston had done their duty, and so had the town of Rochdale.—(Protectionist cheers.) The Hon. Mem ber was proceeding to read extracts from the Bolton Chronicle, when The SPEAKER said that the Hon. Member could not read any extract which referred to the debates in the House. Mr. FERRAND—This is an account of proceedings which took place in Lancashire, and which I may, perhaps, read to the House? The SPEAKER—No. Mr. FERRAND—Very well; then he would do his utmdit to leave out every thing which referred to the debates.— (Laughter.) He would merely allude to what took place at those two meetings. The paper went on to say that Rochdale had also raised its voice, and, on the Monday evening previous, one of the most crowded meetings that had ever been held there tack place in the People's Institution, chiefly to disprove the statements made by Mr. Bright. That Hon. Gentleman had said that the people of Rochdale were unfavourable to the Ten Hours' Bill. The meeting was called for eight o'clock, but long before that time the spacious hall, which was the largest room in the town, was crowded to suffocation, and hun dreds were compelled to go away, as they were not able to ob tain Mr. John Whittaker, the High Constable of Rochdale, presided, and it was a remarkable fact that the pro ceedings were conducted by factory workers. There were present a large number of factory girls, who appeared to take great interest in the -aroceedings.—( Laughter.) The Chair man briefly opened the proceedings, and said that the requisi tion which had been presented to him was of sufficient import ance to justify him in calling that meeting. The whole meet ing declared by their cheers and their resolutions that they were in favour of the Ten Hours' Bill. —( Hear, hear.) Mr. Bright had been invited to attend that meeting to make goad his statements, but he did not make his appearance. The meeting pronounced the state ments of Mr. Bright to be (he dare not make use of the word in that House)—lies.—( Laughter.) Now, then, that was the result of the meeting of the operatives of the town of Rochdale —a town at which the Hon. Member resided when he was at home.—( Laughter.) He (Mr Ferrand thought it would be well for the Hon Member for Durham it in future he took care how he attacked either himself or any other Hon. Member of that House.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member for Bolton ( Dr. Bowring) was pr , sent in the House last even ing, and in his ( air. Ferrand's) ahsence he stated that he (Mr. Ferrand) had said that the factory workers were naked, and that their dwellings were of the most wretched description. He would ask the Hon. and Learned Member whether he had made that statement ? Did the Hon. and Learned Member mean to say that he used those words? Dr. BOWRING—Go on. Mr. FERRAND —Then he begged to state that he never uttered one word of the kind. The Ron. and Learned Mem ber had therefore stood up in that House in his (Mr. Fer rand's) absence, and had put words intohis mouth which he had never used—(Loud cheers)—for the purpose of injuring him in the opinion of that Howie and of the country.—(Cheers.) Now, he asked if this was fair , m anl y , or honourable conduct? —( Hear, hear.) He was prepared to fight the battle of poli tics, which he espoused, but he would not make a single charge which he did not solemnly believed to he true, and he was not prepared to stand by. Would the House listen to the words he did make use of ? He said that Mr. Ashworth complained in a letter to the Poor-law Commissioner , ' that wages had risen 10 per cent., and he asked the Poor-law Com missioners to send some agricultural labourers to his mill. A Committee was inquiring at the time into their conditi in. He called upon the Hon. Member for Bolton ( Dr. Bow ring) to deny the statement—to set aside all consideration of their former friendship—that it was proved on this Commit tee that the labourers surrounding the mill were living upon 20. a day; and, more than this, it was proved that many of them had not worn a shirt for five years ; that they had no fur niture, no clothes,: no chairs, no tables—a single tea-chest served for a table and drawers.—(" Hear" from the protec• tionists.) He made these statements upon the evidence of a Mr. Macgill, a large manufacturer at Manchester, who stated on the 9th of June, in the year 1844, before a Committee ap pointed by this House, in answer to a question put to him on the nature of the food of the labourers, that the chief portion of their food was oatmeal porridge, potatoes, and a small quantity of butcher meat, which they might perhaps obtain once a week. With reference to the amount of earnings, he stated that they could not earn more than 'lad. a day; and as to their clothing, he could not recollect a single case where any weaver ever bought a new jacket for years. He had known some of them who had no blankets, and whose only covering was a coarse covering which originally cost 2s. 6d. With reference to furniture, he stated that he observed many of their houses without a chair, without a stool, the only article of furniture being a tea-chest, which served for the purposes of a table and drawers. Having made this statement, he would now call upon the Honourable Member to repeat the statements he had made, or, if he had the feeling of a gentleman, to retract them.—( Hear.) As to the Noble Lord, the Member for Yorkshire, he (Mr. Ferranti) felt assured that the Noble Lord would shrink with horror from making any statement to this House that he did not be lieve to be true; but, at the same time, he was aware that the Noble Lord had made statements which he (Mr. Ferrand) could satisfy him were not founded in fact. He could tell the House that he was aware that there were many men who, to his knowledge, were employed in factories, and had been com pelled to sign petitions in favour of the corn-laws.—( Hear, hear.) And he would say it was now high time for this House to take cognisance of the manner in which petitions to the House were manufactured and; were paid for by the League.— ( Hear, hear.) And this he was prepared to prove before a a Committee of this House.—( Hear, hear.) He had heard of some cases in which men were actually paid for procuring names, and one man had been paid for procuring 1,400 names —( Hear, hear)—and if any man said ":No" to his statement, he should challenge him to demand a Committee, and he would prove this statement. He now held in his hand a letter from a man employed in a mill near Leeds, who was ready to prove the manner in which names were procured for these petitions. He would hand the letter to the Hon. Member opposite, but he should request of him not to disclose his name, as it might iujure him. He (Mr. Ferrand) thought he had now tatis• tied the House of the injustice of the charges that had been made against him ; and if any others should be made, he would be able to meet them also. Mr. C. BERKELEY said he rose:merely for the purpose of saying a few words on the subject of the manufacturing pe tit ions to which the Honourable Member had alluded. —( Hear. ) He had himself received a petition fer presentation to that House on Wednesday last, containing 954 signatures. The petition purported to be that of the inhabitants of Cheltenham, praying fur a repeal of the corn-lawn. After perusing the petition, his attention was drawn to the fact that it bore the Manchester post-mark instead of the Cheltenham.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," from the protectionist side of the House.) This made him suspect that all was not as it should he, and he accordingly wrote to his agent at Cheltenham, stat ing his suspicions, and requesting him to make ati inquiry. He also wrote to the four gentlemen whose names appeared -in the top of the petition, one of whom was a Mr. Stephen Ree. Now he (the lion. Member) had received a commu nication from that gentleman to the effect that there was only one of that name in Cheltenham, and he begged to assure him that he had never signed such a petition, nor had he autho rised any one to sign it for him.—( Loud cheers from the pro tectionists. ) The next letter which he had to submit to the House was from his agent. That gentleman informed him that several of the names to the petition were genuine, so far as the persons residing in Cheltemham were concerned, but that not one of them, upon whom he had called, had authorised their names to be attached to the petition.—( Hear.) One of the gentlemen, whose naive appeared to the petition informed him that he had never signed it, nor had he been consulted about it, although, if he had been asked to sign a petition for a repeal -if the corn-laws, he would have had no objection to sign such petition.—(Loud and protracted cries of " Hear, hear," from the protectionists.) This he (Mr. Craven Berkeley) thought a most improper proceeding, for it would appear that the pe tition had never been seen at Cheltenham at all, but had been got up at Manchester, and sent direct to London.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," from the pro-corn-law party.) During the whole time he had had the honour of a seat in that House he had been in the habit of voting for free-trade measures but he would scorn to support any measure, or any system, by such means as the present.—( Loud cheers from the protectionists.) If free trade could not stand upon its own merits, then, indeed, did it not deserve the support of Hon. Members.—(Loud cheers and protracted cries of " Hear, hear.") Now, looking it the case he had just brought before the House, he begged to give notice that, on Monday, lie would call the attention of the House to the conduct of the parties who hail Imposed on the Legislature by forging a petition, and so de ceiving the House, which was a gross breach of privilege. 11e claimed the support of the members of the Anti-Corn• law League in endeavouring to trace out the author of this forgery, for if he did not receive assistance at their hands he maintained that the obloquy which would naturally attach itself to the author of this petition would also fall upon them. The Hon. Gentleman then sat down, but rose again upon cries of " Read the prayer of the petition." He read the Brayer, which was for a repeal of the corn-laws. Mr. BRIGHT—The Hon. Member for Cheltenham has lone what he could to corroborate the statement of the Hon. ilember for Knaresborough. I believe there is no Member of this House who will it it believe that this case ought to receive the fullest investigation. I should recommend the lion. Gentleman to move for a Committee to inquire into it, and I ,hould be glad to second it. I would assist him or any other Member in making the fullest investigation into the case he tad now laid before the House. The lion. Member for Knaresborough, in endeavouring to answer the attack which he says I made upon him last night, has merely restated what he said the night before, giving up a letter which he had had some two years since in his pocket, as a proof that his state ment was correct. Now, lam prepared to :say still that I be ,ieve every portion of his statement is utterly unfounded. I have here a letter from Mr Rawson, whose name the lion. Gentleman mentioned as having formed one of the deputa tion of the Board of Trade, respecting the duty on starch. He says—" Mr. Wilson did not iseue the circular requesting the starch-makers to assemble in Manchester. Mr. Wilson did not act as chairman." Now this replies to the two statements made by the Hon. Member. " Nor did any meeting of the sort take place, and no deputation proceeded from such a meet ing, either of the individual members of the council of the League, or any other gentleman. It is true that two other gentlemen and myself—Mr. Wilson was not of the number — proceeded to Lrindon, our object being, however, not to seek w not desire w ita a rd t o fr f ee T o ra t Trade, :' w if e do e are desir e any protective duty on th ' e article ' of starch ; or, if this is aft:lined, we then Ti a te il for an equivalent duty to be levied on memorial to the Boardn e e f xt T extract which I -hall read is from a wheat or flour." fare remission trade in w ef t i d e t !t e s ) w w eh e i . c i h e shouldest,atte T not be h a t afraidour ob ject i w n it s h eek th in e g protective duties is this— thatper cen i t i . m o r foreign competition—( Hear, hear gave foreigne h re r raw.a Fromw sn. : ma terial is kept up in price by the operation of w t e h n e n mad them .) The proposed small duty of 51. starch threatened to destroy their trade, a n d hope with the foreign manufacturer.—( the speeches e t a tad: e s h a i y e hi it is h p ne i from wii the lelt H be on. un ia , l i e e m rs la te e o r d a . n_d which that at trete is made in this (Cheers and laughter.) The Hon. Member- is not able to see duty on the foreign counterbalance the that I wish a much hardship, inasmuch as country ; its manufacturers duty on the raw material of :rive nt t — ra a d n e d .— h ( O He l% r ; htheearp.r)oteeStaitatia the oty Hmoant.erii‘alile,yrnhinelrifu,sriesstattheemeoinei it—was this : that Mr. ST sgti vened a meeting repeated oevne is- ment. I say distinctly and p of starch manufacturers, in or o d s e i r ti t v o ely memorialise hat th at t s h ta e t statement ember persist: in.— the other stat6iTieats the Halls wholly without foundation, and that no more true than (Cheers.) The Hon. Member has made a very extraordinary ' statement with respect to Mr. Wilson—a statement which he has been afraid to make in a court of justice. Mr. FER RAND—isio, no. Mr. BRIGHT—Does the Hon. Member recollect that he once charged Mr. Wilson and Mr. Rawson, at a meeting held at Liverpool, which he himself addressed, as being present at a meeting at which a proposition was made for committing the frightful crime of assassination ? Does he recollect that Mr. Rawson wrote to the solicitors of the Hon. Member to ascer tain if he (Mr. Ferrand) was prepared to stand by the state ments he had made. The Hon. Member stated that he was prepared to stand by theth, as reported in tine lifornins Post newspaper. Mr. RaVlson's solicitor, Mr. Tolson, of Bradford, wrote to the Hon. Member's solicitor, stating that it was Mr. Rawson's intention to bring an action for defamation, and asking whether the Hon. Member would give, in addition that the statement of the Morning Post was the one which he was pre pared to stand by, in order to obviate the inconvenience of pro secuting the newspaper, and the Hon. Member intimated that Ise would agree to give a guarantee to the proprietor of the Morning Post to save him harmless from the effect of an action. When Mr. Wilson and Mr. Rawson wrote to the Morning Post, the proprietors of that newspaper stated that they ought not to be prosecuted because they had merely reported in their columns the speech of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough (Mr. Ferrand), and that he had not given them the guarantee that he had stated.—(Cheers.) Every particle of that statement was as untrue as anything ever ut tered by any Hon. Member, or by any one on the face of the earth. It would have been proved untrue in a court of jus tice, but the Hon. Member durst not go into it. With respect to the charges which the Hon. Member has brought against L ee -- rL'. FERRAND interrupted the Hon. Member by inquir ing why Mr. Wilson and Mr. Rawson did not proc eed with their action ? Mr. I3RIG HT—I will state why the prosecution was not followed. The Anti-Corn-law League appealed to the public through the means of general discussion. —( Cheers, and cries of " Oh, oh.") They would scorn, every man of them. to go into a court of justice against an editor who, in the fulfilment of a great and meritorious duty to the public in general, publishes in his columns good and, I must say, bad speeches also—( Hoar, hear)—for he had inserted the speech of the Honourable Member in which these unfounded statements were made. The Hon. Member had referred to the condition of the people of the towns of Rochdale and Bolton, and had intimated his opinion that they were in a sad and miserable condition. Now, he did not want any certificate from the Hon. Member for the feeling of the people of those towns, for the people of Rochdale were well acquainted with any small merits which he might possess ; they knew him intimately, and with regard to the Hon. Mem ber for Knaresborough, he would venture to assert that Roch dale was the last place in the county where the Hon. Gentle man would be received with cordiality. The Hon. Gentleman must have come recollection of the reception which he met with the last time he wade is appearance there, and he thought that the present statement was quite as unfounded as those which had appeared in the newspaper to which he had refer red ; and he would go further, and assert, if he might be allowed to use language which was found upon the journals of the House, and would say that the statement of the Hon. Member was calumnious, and absurd, and unfounded altogether. —( Loud cheers from the League benches.) Dr. BOWRING thought that he was called upon to say a few words respecting the statement made the other night by the Hon. Member for Knaresborough, and they should be a very few words. The Hon. Gentleman complained that he had not risen to answer him the moment be had sat down ; the fact was that he was unable to reply at that time, for he was not present at the termination of the Hon. Member's speech. The Hon. Member had, in the course of his observations, used expressions which intimated that the labouring portion of the community of Bolton and its immediate neighbourhood were badly clad, badly fed, and badly housed, and were con tent with any accommodation. In connexion with these assertions he had used the name of Mr. Henry Ashworth, and had stated that that gentleman had been the instrument of introductng a large portion of the inhabitants from the agricultural population; he had further, its connexion with this transaction, employed a term in the highest degree offensive—he had called this a cold-blooded act. Now he wished to disconnect the name of Mr. Ashworth from any such term ; and he would take the liberty of referring to the Noble Lord the Member for Newark (Lord John Manners), who was intimately acquainted with the condition of the whole population of the town, and was perfectly compe tent to form a correct judgment upon it. He knew the condition of the people who were all dependent upon him. And he was quite willing to leave the whole case in the hands of the Noble Lord, and to let the truth of his statement be tested with that of the Hon. Member. Mr. ROEBUCK, who was extremely inaudible in the commencement of his remark, and was understood to observe, that he considered he was justified by all the rules of that House in presuming that an Hon. Member, who had occu pied the last two hours and a half of the debate, in a very fierce attack on Hen. Members at that side of the House, and on persons out of it, would in mere fairness have been 'in his place to hear the answer to be made to his vituperation.— ( Hear, hear.) He would not say one word of the attack the Hon. Gentleman had made upon him for his failure in life. But he would say in all his misfortunes, it had never been his fate to have a body of gentlemen assembled in England to declare that which he had stated to have been afalse hood and a calumny. There was a resolution now remaining on the books of the House which would descend to posterity— that a Member of that House had been guilty of an infamous calumny on two other Members. —(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member said that he founded his belief on a resolution passed by certain persons in the town of Rochdale. But he (Mr. Roebuck) believed the resolution of the House of Commons, which was just to the same effect.— (Cheers.) The Hon. Member never denied—he had never answered it ; and as long as it remained on the books of that House the Hon. Gentleman was welcom • to make whatever statement he wished. He (Mr. Roebuck) was perfectly satisfied so that such statement was afterwards weighed in the balance of the good sense of the House. That was his (Mr. Roebuck's) answer.—(Hear, hear.) One word as regarded what had been said by the Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Inglis) op posite. He stated that he heard him (Mr. Roebuck) employ personalities in that House. Why, if he did use them, or if he made charges against Hon. Gentlemen, he succeeded in proving them—( Hear, hear)—and if such could be termed a personality, why so could an indictment.—(Hear, hear.) fie charged Hen. Members with corrupt practices, and he proved his charge.—(" No, no," from a Gentleman opposite.) He appealed to the resolution of the Committee, who, without a division, fully convicted Hon. Gentlemen, and, amongst the rest, the Hon. Member who cried " No."—( Hear. ) Mr. DISRAELI should say he was one of those who very much regretted that his Hon. Friend the Member for Knares borough should think it his duty to make an attack on mem bers of the agricultural body ; and he should say that he (Mr. Disraeli) differed with the Honour able Gentleman in his views en that subject.—( Hear.) He had often remonstrated with him on the subject ' • but he should say this, that his Hon. Friend the Member for Knares borough was prepared to say the same outside the walls of that House that he said within them.—(Hear, hear.) Such was his Hon. Friend's conviction, and he believed that he 'slits merely fulfilling his duty in acting as he did.—( firer, hear.) Now, that being the case, he (Mr. Disraeli) could not see, from the way in which the Hon. Meraber for Knaresborough acted, how he had done anything to call for the marked ex pression of disapprobation at the ands of that House.—( Hear, hear.) Now, with regard to the name of another gentleman, Mr. George Wilson, chairman of the Ant i- Coin-law League, be (Mr. Disraeli) had a few words to say. He believed Mr. Wilson to be a very good sort of pers on —( Hear)—and, no doubt, when better known was better liked.—( Hear, and a laugh). He believed that for a series of years, he was an agitator, and had expressed his opinions on public men and measures with little reserve ; and he was surprised that that gentleman, or his representatives, should think fit to show their thin skin on the present occasion.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh). Now, as to the resolutions of committees, and such stories, he (Mr. D'lsraeli) did not want to listen to them, because he was as prejudiced on one side as his Hon. Friend was on the other. —( Hear, hear.) As regarded Mr. Ash worth, he should ssy that he knew sufficient of his family to bear testimony that it was one which was not alone a credit but an honour to the country.---( Loud cries of " Hear, hear," from both sides of the House. ) Was it desirable that everybody in that House should be of the opinion, or that Hen. Members having different prejudices should not express them. He really however thought that his Hon. Friend the Member for Knaresborough had the best of the argument.—( Cheers.) He (Mr. Disraeli) deprecated attacks on absent individuals, who were, perhaps, as worthy men as any in the country._ (Cheers from the Liberals)—but still he thought that his Hon. Friend had substantiated his position in the view he had taken.—( Cheers.) The Hon. Member for Durham, for the city of Durham, had made a confused statement with respect to an accusation which had been urged against his Hon. Friend because he had accused certain Members of the Anti-Corn law League of being assassins. He would not take it on himself to decide whether the Members of the Anti-Corn-law League should have prosecuted his Hon_ Friend or the newspapers, but this he did know, that he had heard the members of the Anti-Corn-law League accused of tieing assassins by a most distinguished individual in that House— (Tremendous cheering)—who they were very ready to support on that occasion.—( Continued cheering.) Why not prosecute the Right Hon. Baronet?—( Laughter and reiterated cheering.) Why not at once strike at the monarch of the wood, instead of preying upon the smaller deer ?—( Cheers.) If they wished to vindicate their characters from the stigma of being assassins, they could always have ample opportunity, by referring to the pages of Hansard; and as he had no doubt that the Right Hon. Gentleman would give a guarantee to his solicitor to defend the action, they might prosecute him immediately.—( Shouts of laughter.) He th fight that too much had seen made by the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath of a resolution come to by the House some two years ago, with regard to his Hen Friend. i —( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Disraeli) had thought that the most ridiculous resolution the House had ever arrived at.— ( Hear, hear.) He believed that the Right Hon. Baronet was very averse to bringing it before the; House. The Right Hon. Gentleman hail himself a natural sense for humour, and he did all he could to prevent these proceedings.—(Hear, hear.) He stated that he had no desire to go on, but the whole had originated in the quarter of the House in which everything disagreeable always originated, namely, with the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath.—( Cheers and laughter.) And when the Honourable and Learned Member described, with that dramatic effect which was so worthy of a minor theatre— ( Roars of laughter)—the horrible consequences of that resolution (Loud laughter) and declared that his Hon. Friend had uttered a calumnious statement, he ought to have looked to the Hon. and Learned Member for Cork (Mr. O'Connell) who had been placed in a somewhat similar predicament. He (Mr. Disraeli) was in the House at the time, and he understood that some statements of the Hon. and Learned Member were supposed to calum niate certain Members of the! House, and he ( Mr. Disraeli) believed that he was reproved by the predecessor of the Right Hon. Gentleman, who tilled the Speaker's chair. He would not make a point of that resolution ; he would leave his Hon. Friend and the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath to deal with it as they liked.—( Laughter.) But if his Hon. Friend would only follow his (Mr. Disraeli's) example, never to abuse any one—( Roars of laughter, which continued for several seconds j —if he did se he (Mr. Ferrand) would never be put in the position in which he had been repeatedly and unjustly placed.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member for Bath, who talked so much of gentlemanly proceedings, and referred to the resolution formerly passed, should apply those observations and that resolution to his own case, lie said that he never spoke with unnecessary acerbity, or acted in a per sonal and unbecoming manner. This was not the fact. It was not the first time that he had violated the rules of the House and offended gentlemanly manners. He (Mr. Disraeli) knew not of one case, but of repeated instances, in which he t r ib q t e corrupt intentions aeubvbteriuhii t tv i. leo ig:(He.d:liihmernratihtedeDm3edini rhsehaee: :Members meseblarsei petr)ahlis)f,nlui Tre4yessgvh,rwaisiri of: h d hsrmt i (the Hon. and Learned Gentleman) had accused himself (Mr. Disraeli) of the most improper and corrupt motives. Various have been the occasions on which the Hon. and Learned Member would immediately get up and impute motives and at raffedut e t e osh i r dt e e t od o d al toe h r u w i o a ss i an y . g t ou h e ... noticedtaPerhaps a i L n e, a o r these arpnibiinee Learned treenuAought leh mtin S bt attacks,ou must bring i t s s t i k n a e n w a c t i h d a n t aatsutrhee write tree sso m th u in st a b e e id th p e am fr p u h it l . e — t o ( r H e e v a i r nee hea a r ci. ) Ahis speeches—.(Laughter and cheers.) and Learned Gentleman says that he has never lint ty thean d Hon bitternessa offeeded the rules of the Houses, or imputed improper motives. '1 his was totally ineccuret e . It wonld 14 in the recollect' oi QriiNlPmberi thtit the contrary was the truth, and what laid passed last night and the present fully showed it. This sort of meld dramatic malignity—this sort of Sadler's Wells sarcasm. which was so easily put on—this waving of the hand and point ing with the finger—this lookin g daggers but using none— was, to say the least of it , exceedingly improper.—(Laughter and cheers.) He should say the proper remedy for suchmatter as that now complained of—the best course for 1-'ion. Members to pursue on any question was—not to say an ything that was contrary to gentlemanly courtesy, or that could be fairly looked upon as offensive—( Cheers). Mr. O'CONNELL would not have said one wr,rd had the memory of the Hon. Gentleman not been inaccu'aite and the public might possibly supply with imagination the deficiencies . s r y y. em of election com m itt ees was one of corrup tionst Ile had been censure d i n consequence of of his memory. He hod not been accused oT c a lu mny . H e aidthatnd p the er ji these observations, and the Speaker read him a lecture on the subject. As soon as the Speaker had Concluded, he (Mr. O'Connell) repeated the very words which he had made use of --(Great laughter)—and the House had since confirmed the truth of his remarks, for they abolished that Com m itt ee alto gether. He was very much obliged to the Hon. G ent l eman for vat i a o g n a s. in giving him an opportunity of reit era ti ng t h ose obser vations. Major BERESFORD denied that he was guilty of corrup tion. It was the general feeling of the Committee that he was unjustly, unfairly, and acrimoniously attacked. Mr. B. ESCOTT said that he was perfectly justified in the observations he bad made in the absence of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough. Lord JOHN MANNERS said that, so far as he knew, the observations which had been made respecting Mr. Ashworth were by no means correct. He could hear testimony to the admirable manner in which that gentleman had discharged the obligations which his position imposed upon him. No one was more fully impressed than he was with the great responsibility which attached to him as one of the greatest cotton manufac turers in the empire, and no one was more fully alive to the fulfilment of the duties of his situation. Mr. FIELDEN ( who was totally inaudible in the gallery for some time) said (as we understood), that the manufacturers had applied to the Poor-law Commissioners to send down to the manufacturing, from the agricultural districts, a number of labourers for the purpose of equalising the price of labour and that they (the Poor-law Commissioners) had dune so, and sent down 10,000 to the manufacturing districts. If they looked to the Commission of Inquiry into these districts, they would find that the statement made by the Hon. Member for Knares borough had not been incorrect. Sir ROBERT PEEL said he would not have risen to take part in this discussion had it not been for what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury. That Hon. Gentle man recalled to the recollection of the House what had taken place, he believed, about three years since, in the course of a debate that took place at that time, when he (Sir R. Peel) put an erroneous construction upon an expression used by the Hon. Gentleman opposite, the Member for Stockport.—( Hear, hear.) That Hon. Gentleman having explained his expres sions, it was his (Sir R. Peel's) intention at that time that the explanation which he made to the Hon. Member in reply should relieve him from the imputation which he then put upon him. —(Hear, hear.) If any one was present at that time he would recollect that he made a complete disavowal of his expressions, and he would also recollect that he said that if that explanation was not considered to be sufficient, he would take the earliest opportunity of gielng an ample apology.—( Hear, hear.) Those were his (Sir R. Peel's) intentions, and he thought that a re ference to the record of the day would show that such must have been his intentions, and he thought that the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury, after the lapse of three years, should not have revived that subject. His (Sir R. Peel's) intention was entirely to withdraw the expressions which he had made under an erroneous view. Mr. R. COBDEN—I feel happy, Sir, at having an oppor tunity of remarking upon what has fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet. I am sorry to say. that at the time to which he alluded I thought, and I believe the country also thought, that the Right Hon. Gentleman did not make that disavowal which was due to me. Still, Sir, the matter is altogether so extra ordinary, and as the words which were uttered by me appeared, in the opinion of the greater part of the Hon. Gentlemen on that side of the House to bear the interpretation put upon them by the Right Hon. Baronet, I think I may be excused for occupying the attention of the House. I will take the present disavowal as an ample disavowal by the Right Hon. Gentleman, and as entirely satisfactory.—( Cheers. ) Sir, I am very glad that he has made that complete disavowal, and I think it will be as pleasant to his feelings as it is to mine to have had this opportunity of expressing my regret, that while the remembrance of what has passed in this House was rank ling in my own mind, I have alluded in public to the Right Hon. Gentleman in terms which I regret after this explana tion.—( Cheers.) I sincerely hope that both what he has said and what I have said may be completely obliterated, so that no one may be justified in hereafter alluding to it. Mr. HUTT said that, on Tuesday next, he had a motion coming under the consideration of the House, and as he had no wi,h to retard in the smallest degree the progress of the present most important and protracted debate, he wished to be in. formed by the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Govern. ment whether it was his wish that the motion should be post poned? Sir R. PEEL was understood to Fisk the Hon. Member to postpone his motion for the present. If the Hon. Member would do so it would be a convenience to the Government, and expedite the dispatch of public business. Mr. HUTT would readily consent to the request of the Right Hon. Baronet, and trusted his example would be followed by other Hon. Gentlemen who had motions on the paper. Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said that, as it was the wish and understanding on both sides of the House that the debate should close that evening, he wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Treasury how he proposed to arrange the public business for next week ? The Right Hon. Baronet had a motion on the paper for Monday relative to the Indian army, and he presumed that subject would occupy the House the whole of Monday night. Sir ROBERT PEEL (who spoke in so low a tone of voice as to be perfecty inaudible in the gallery), was understood to impress upon the House that he could not have done otherwise than take the earliest opportunity of asking the House to award its thanks to the commanders and men of the British Indian army, who had lately so distinguished themselves in de fending the rights of this country. He did not, however, anti cipate that this subject would occupy the attention of the House very long, and so soon as it was disposed of he should proceed to move his resolutions in Committee, and on the following day he should propose to bring forward another branch of his measure. He was sure the House would see the necessity of their getting through the measure as speedily as possible, as delays only proved detrimental to nearly every in terest in the country. It was then agreed that the House at its rising should ad journ till Monday. PUBLIC WORi:S (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of Sir J, G I , e.HANI, this Bill was read a third time and passed. Sir R. PEEL, in pursuance of a notice he had already given, moved that all petitions relating to the timber duties be printed. After a few words from Mr. LIDDELL, the motion was put and carried. THE ADJOURNED DEBATE. On the order of the day for going into Committee on the Customs' and Corn Importation Acts being read, Mr. G. BANK ES rose and said, that he in one respect re gretted the delay that had taker, place in resuming this ad journed debate, because he concurred in the general wish which had been expressed that this debate should come to a conclu sion that evening, and, as far 10 he was concerned, he would not occasion much delay. He would endeavour to follow at a dis tance the speech of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton, but he would not imitate him in point of that duration which occupied so large a portion of the time of the House last night. He did not regret that on this occasion a measure had been forwarded previously to resuming this de bate, he meant the measure which made some provisions for Ireland, to meet an emergency that had arisen in that country. It was to such measures that they might look in order to meat the emergency. He was glad to find that it was now under stood that they were not discussing an Irish question, but the great measure, which has been so strangely forced upon the attention of the House. He now understood that the question was not mixed up with the supposed deficiency of food in Ire land, and lie was happy to perceive that they might now calmly and fully consider the question ; and if this measure should receive the sanction of this House, it would be without any of those disadvantages which would necessarily belong to the passing a permanent measure to meet a temporary emergency. He recollected that in the year 1822 the dis tress was then greater than anything which had been stated to exist at this period ; and when he recollected that at t t in t ah h i a cs t t ieo t on i u m no e tf r yc t h ,o ere rhn wc w oe a u s ol ud l t dhbeyi it g possiblya r n ea y te m s t e a g nb l u se t r os e uf m pe e po i o l r y sne tdhe thatve e p r r k e a s nn e o n wi t nnt d r i s tress in Ireland? Ile did not wish to detain the Right Hon. Baronet, who he saw was about to leave the House, and he would, therefore, postpone the further observations he had to make upon the state of Ireland for the purpose of addressing his re marks to that part of the transaction which had had such weight upon his own mind, and upon the minds of others, both in and out of this House, and which materially affects the singular crisis into which we have been brought by the conduct of the Right Hon. Baronet, and which had been so unusual, unpre cedented, and, he had almost said, unconstitutional. In his opinion it appeared rather strange that the Right Hon. Baronet should have adopted such a course as this; for he found that upon this occasion the Right Hon. Baronet bad exercised a power and privilege, as Prime Minister of this country, which it was most unusual to do, in order to influence a majority of the Cabinet to vote with him on this measure. The Right Hon. Baronet was not then a member of the administration, for he had resigned his place as Prime Minister, and, there fore, he acted only as a private individual and as a private individual, and not as a Minister of the Crown he had exercised his influence with her Majesty in the formation of a new Cabinet. New he (Mr. Bankes) was not aware of such an example being set by any Minister of the Crown upon any former occasion ; and, therefore, though he dare not say that such was an unconstitutional course, it certainly had no prece dent. When the Right Hon. Baronet made his first speech in this House this session upon this subject, he made no allusion to this interview with her Majesty. Upon that occa sion the Noble Lord must have had the opportunity of reading the letter placed in his hands by his Sovereign. He found that the Right Hcia. Baronet had promised his support to whatever Ministry should take office to carry out the great changes which he had contemplated in the laws of the country. Now, when the Right Hon. Baronet proposed such a course it must be looked upon as a great change indeed—as a great sacrifice of public principle. Had the Right Hon. Gentleman allowed the sense of the country to be taken upon so great a question, then, indeed, if the people were in favour of the pro posed change, no one could oppose the measure; but this opportunity had not been afforded them, and they bad a right to complain.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Indeed the change of principles on the part of the Right Hon. Baronet was looked upon by the country with a very jealous eye ; it was not such a condition as could be looked at in any other light. When the coalition between Lord North, Mr. Fox, and Mr. Burke, took place, it could not be said to have been for the purpose of seeking the spoils of office ; those men were above such a suspicion. The course pursued by the Ministers entitled them, as the representatives of large con stituencies, to call on them not to violate the pledges which they had given to the people, or to the constitution under which they lived. At any rate, if they were determined to proceed with a t e y m h e a n d t aptr,odoaoffuonrdde the hpeeocpalelleadnonoptphoermtuntoitydiosi a th ol e vet the measure P sitting in judgment on their measures. He referred to the latter of Lord J o h n R usse ll to the electors of the city o f London in Decemb er , in which he stated that great public questions ought a l ways to b e d e cided by the unequivocal the public . —(Hear, expressions ofhear.) He was, therefore, at a loss now to understand why that Noble Lord did not carry ou t t h e pr i nc iples he had enunciated, and call on the Governm en t t o ap p ea l to the people. ( He ar .) On a former occasion the Noble Lord stated that " free-trade opinions were far from being predominant in this country." Ile gated he had altered his opinions since that period, and that free-trade principles were now generally entertained. But he (Mr. B an k es ) d en i e d that they were. Let_ them look to the opinion& of the countryi as expressedn th tians. Let them l oo k t o th e r esult of the late Westminster election. Where wa s th e L or d of the Admiralty, who formerly rsoresented that city ? (Sir Robert Peel, who sat a short distance from the Hon. Member, here made some remark which did not reach the gallery-) Well, who should d d decide de who between those cont rover t e d opinions vernment to undergo that ordeal, as the response time would be - e unequivocally aga i ns t th em . H e remembered with having the no when many Members of th a t H ouse were twitted de cide them? The coun t r y wou ld d eci de. Bat he defied the lo e ; d constituents, and were told th a t they represented the mcnev in their breichte-pocket hatred of their cerutituenth Th. Noble ' lord the Member for Yorkshire (Lord Morpeth) re- P res '. nted his 5/. note, and the Member for St oc kp ort sa id t h at 5 . . note was worth 5,0001., and he was right, because it gave nim a power which he had not possessed before If the Hon. Gentleman talked of delegates, he begged to ask whose dele gate was he ? He was not likely to undervalue the power of that League of which so much notice had been taken, when he saw to what a position its influence and activity had reduced a great party, and in what a condition the leader of that party stood in regard to the country. He saw that the one wan annihilated, and the other dependent. Then again, if he turned to the elections, he would ask them to show him the place where a free English election had been held, and he would show them the place where a protectionist had been returned. What then was the use of the 2,000 rotes of which the Noble Lord opposite had made such a magnificent boast? He would venture to as sert, that although the constitution of this country was at pre sent in abeyance, that the people would hereafter arise to vindi cate its integrity, and give their verdict in its favour. Let them take the last and most striking instance—the case of the Noble Lord the Chief Secretary for Ireland. That Noble Lord had gone down to the county of Nottingham with the full support of the Government, of which he was a member and an ornament. He had everything in his favour—he had character, ability, position, and support, while he (Mr. Bankes) believed that his opponent had every legal instrument in the county retained against him. He would net say much about that—but what was the result? That Noble Lord had gone down to the county with all the support of the Ministry, and with a greater assurance of success than Was entertained even for the success of the measure now before the House. Ile had expressed himself confidently, and no doubt had written up to his friends in London—and yet the election turned against him. There was, however, one very extraordinary circumstance about this election. It was sur prising that, although the opponent of the Noble Lord to whom he had referred had been elected the day before yesterday, he had not yet made his appearance in the House, although a gentleman who had been elected only yesterday had this night taken his seat. No doubt with equal sincerity and equal confidence he wrote up to his friends in London hat nothin could be moe certain than their success. The ( freeholders were every r moment sending in their adhesions, and the Peers do not dare to inter fere with the election.—( Hear, hear.) And sow, with these examples before them, were they asking too much when it was admitted that the fate of Ireland did not depend upon these measures, and when it was conceded that there was no neces sity for haste, alarm, or anxiety ; were they, he would repeat it again, asking too much from the Government to require they should be permitted to have the opinion of the whole con stituency of the country expressed upon the measure.—( Hear, hear.) Some members had resigned their seats upon this question, others had retained them, and some had adopted a middle course, and finally resigned. He considered that a passage from Swift seemed peculiarly applicable to the latter class— " lie fitted the halter, ho traversed the cart, And often took leave, but seemed loath to depart." He would tell these Honourable Gentlemen in their seats that the law was upon their side, hut honour seemed to be on the other. The Hon. Gentleman having cited the opinion of Al gernon Sidney on the conduct of Members of Parliament, con tinued, by saying that the learned author proclaimed the punishment of defaulting Members, who betrayed their trust, to be scorn, infamy, and hatred, and the assurance of being rejected by their constituents when next they sought the honour of representing these —(Hear, hear.) However, the law was one way, and honour was the other.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for Wolverhampton, when he spoke last night, ex pressed his fear at seeing such a leader at the head of the Go vernment; and he (Mr. Bankes) should agree with him, parti cularly when he asserted that the present was a great and cri tical crisis, and one that strongly reminded him of the period of the French Revolution between the years 1789 and 1791. ( Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Bankes) thought he could find in the pages of a learned author, who wrote most eloquently on that period, a few statements that, in different language, would illustrate his views much more happily than he could hope to do himself. With that view he opened " Alison'e Modern Europe," in which he found these words:—" The existing cause, as a physician would say, of the revolution was the spread of innovation, which, like a dread ful malady at that time overspread the earth and precipi tated all classes into a passion for changes of which they were far from perceiving the effects, and the most ardent in the cause were those whose fortunes were about to perish." He found these words also, " The young nobles applauded without suspecting that they themselves would be the first victims." 'There were then Lord Lincolns as well as now.—(Cheers.) There were then as now, sons ranged against their fathers; and in addition to public mischiefs the whole system of private society was destroyed.—(Continued cheering.) The same author thus wrote, giving a description of the Prime Minister of that time, " his private character was unexceptionable ; he was possessed of immense wealth; and he made a noble use of it ; he was liberal without pride or prodigality, and he would have been a perfect private citizen had it not been for a secret vanity which made him sacrifice everything to public popularity, and which brought on unheard-of calamities. Had Turgot united to these great and good qualities an adequate knowledge of human nature, he would have been a great and wi.e Minister, hut unhappily he lacked that one great advantage, and he therefore hurried on those dangerous measures. He was entirely ignorant of human nature, and pursued his de signs without considering what effects they would produce." In comparing these two characters, as thus described by the historian, he found in them a wonderful resemblance to the public present feeling, Prime ,Minister; n vetist e r charged; and,theignorant Right tho H u o g n h . h ß e a m ro i n g e h t t be of having intentionally not only avoided but c o n trived to p rev ent a recurrence to the public v o ic e a t a p er i o d w h en h e s h ou ld have been convinced of his er r or . It was th roug h th a t Al- Al gernon Sidney had laid down the law, as he had read out of that book, but he did not contend for septennial Parliaments, and there were many now whose opinions were changed upon this particular also.— ( Laughter.) Where great changes took place in the mind of a public Minister, it was advisable that. her Majesty should be advised (as he had no doubt Lord John Russell had advised) to appeal to the people. But then it happened that the compromise took place between the two great parties to which he had already alluded. He would now recur to that great incident, as it well deserved to be called—he meant the letter which the Right Hon. Baronet had addressed to her Majesty on the Bth of September last. At the very time when that communication was passing between the Right Hon. Baronet and the Queen, another one was passing to her Majesty from Lord John Russell. The opinions of both at this time must have been similar,t for it was impossible at that time for any one to hold office that held other opinions to these. And how long had the Noble Lord (John Russell) held the office consequent on the retirement of Sir R. Peel? Only a day and a half, and he retired from the attempt to form a Ministry because he had not confidence in carrying out mea sures such as he, along with Sir Robert Peel. considered ne cessary for the welfare of the country.—( Hear, hear.) In plain English, the real cause, which the Noble Lord had him self admitted, was this :—He found, if he accepted office, and secured the support of the Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel), the latter would bring over with him hut few of his sup porters, while on the other hand, if the Right Hon. Baronet continued in office, he would secure so much more support on the Conservative side of the House to the proposed measures, while the Noble Lord could guarantee all his supporters on the Opposition side of the House. This was the real history of the Noble Lot el giving up the attempt to form a Ministry. But why did not the Noble Lord, or the Right Hon. Baronet, appeal to the people, if they considered the country was with them ? Their not doing so showed that the voice of the people was against their proposed measures, and they were fearful of appealing to it. He (Mr. Bankes) had been told that this voice had been expressed in another way—that is, by petitions presented to that House. On that point, what had occurred that night respecting petitions to Parliament would show what little weight was to be attached to them. The Government had given no reason why the Members of that House should not stand face to face with their consti tuents, where, if they made promises, they should take care to keep them.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet had spoken against exaction of promises, but they should recollect that the usage and custom of the country had been in favour of candidates who sought to be returned to that House, making a statement of their political views prior to the election. They had a day of nomination for the express purpose of questions being put to candidates, and for the purpose of enabling such candidates to explain their political principles to the electors. If Hon. Members are to become so careful and chary of their opinions, he doubted if they would have so many supporters in a future Parliament.—( Hear, hear.) He did not think voters were induced to take Hon. Members according to their looks.— ( Hear and laughter.) They would still continue that incon venient practice of asking questions, and they would not only expect to receive answers to those questions, but also the per formance of those promises. It had been stated that during the canvass of Lord Lincoln, an Hon. Member waited upon him, who was much interested in the affairs of Ireland, and he stated that, as the result of his interview, he was perfectly satisfied with the Noble Lord's opinions upon that subject. Would Lord Lincoln depart from what he had said to the Hon. Member who had waited upon him; and if bound to the performance of his promise to him, was he not also bound to the lowest man in the crowd? And was not that poor man entitled to ask his epinion, and to receive his answer from the candidate ? Was there any diffe rence in rank or station which enabled a person with impunity to disregard his promises and engagements ? Was there any thing to cause him to affect a feeling of contempt because these promises had been made to a meaner class ?—( Hear, hear. ) Such doctrines would receive from the people of England their merited censure. Boroughs which were renovated, as it was called, at the passing of the Reform Bill, would not be thus treated.—(Hear, hear.) They would insist that their repre• sentatives, who had changed their opinions, should appeal again to them to ascertain if they would be received with their altered opinions. Why was he (Mr. Bankes) not allowed still to represent the small borough which he represented prior to the passing of the Reform Bill ? Was he not to be returned according to his opinion? If not, he considered that a great deal of time and unnecessary trouble had been expended in passing what has been called the Reform Bill. They had now the means of ascertaining the real feelings of the people with respect to the present momentous ques tions. They should now see whether, in the people's opinion, the measure was right and expedient. They ( the protectionists) maintained that it would be far more injurious than beneficial, and it was this conviction that had driven them to oppose the Bill at this stage, and in so pertinacious a manner. For the purpose of saving time, as well as for other reasonable pur poses, they had resolved en taking the division at this stage, and, whatever might be the result, if they failed, they would fail with the conviction of having honestly performed their duty. The country regretted to see the union of men who were so opposite in principle ; but whatever might be the re sult of the struggle here, he trusted that in another place a way would be opened which would afford the people an oppor tunity of declaring their feelings. Year after year, during the whole duration of this Parliament, the votes would show that the Government, by immense majorities, would not sanction such a measure as that now proposed. He could not for a mo ment suppose that the other House would refuse the exercise of their prerogative, by causing an appeal to the people against this most extraordinary and extravagant measure. ESCOTT would give his vote in support of the measure, with great confidence in the results of the future. He thought that one of the principal features connected with the measure had almost been lost sight of in the debate, and that feature was--can such a measure as that now proposed be possibly prevented ? If those Hon. Gentlemen who talked so much about pleading the farmers' cause, who were so constant in their defence of protection, and who proposed to be the far mers' friends, were to tell him the truth, and say that protec tion could be no longer maintained, they would then be acting more consistently with their character of being the farmers' friend. Another objection that had been raised during the debate was—supposing the question to Ise right, and that it was impossible to prevent its being carried out, the persons who constitute the present Government were not those who ought to carry it into effect. He (Mr. Estcott) believed that the people of this country were comparatively little con cerned as to the particular individuals who might carry the measure into effect. He would admit that those who had un dertaken to conduct the measure were exposed to the charge of inconsistency, and he had not escaped from that charge. He had been called upon by the Hon. Member for Knaresborough to state why he did not tender the resignation of his seat, and appeal to his constituent on his change of principle. He would inform the Hon. Gentleman that not one single contituents had intimated to him in the sliohest mariner any wish for him to vacate his seat. A Noble Lord had also said that he could not conceive how it was consistent with his (Mr. Eseott's) personal honour to support the motion for going into this question. He would tell the Noble Lord what his opinion of the personal honour of a Member of Parliament was. It was against his personal honour to tamper with his constituents. It was his personal honour to give up his time day and night to study the interests of his electors and of the country. And to give a modern instance, supiesse a person came into that House, who was comparatively ignorant of the different questions of political economy. It was his personal honour to make himself master of those ques tions, in order to be able to know how to give his vote with judgement. It was also his duty to throw over board any degree of character for personal consistency, in order to obtain a much higl er degree of character, as au efficient servant of the general interests of the people. That was his idea of the personal honour of a Member of that House. It had been stated by the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Dorsetshire, that lie had considered it almost impossible for any Government to have formed so strange and sweeping a measure of commercial policy as that which was now proposed to be adopted. From the year 184'2, when the Right Hon. Baronet at head of the Treasu-y, and the late Vice-President of the Board of Trade, made their speeches on the Corn Bill which was introduced into the House, he (Mr. Escott) not only anticipated some such measure as the present, but he told every man who theught proper to ask his opinion, that some such measure must be the inevitable consequence of the Bill that was then introduced. There were some persons of distin guished station, to whom he was under some obligations for many acts of condescension, who had done him the honour to consult him on matters of public affairs. He told those indi viduals, distinctly and freely, that the total repeal of taxes on imports would be necessary in consequence of the principles which had been laid down by the Right Hon. Baronet and the late Vice-President of the Board of Trade. The occurrences since 1842 had only ren dered it more apparent that some such change as the present must be introduced. Year after year, up to the present time, they had heard debates on the corn-laws, but he had never heard during the whole of that time one single argument brought forward in defence of the principle of the corn-laws from that bench. (The Hon. Gentleman then pointed to the Ministerial bench, and was interrupted with cries of No, no.") He had heard very clever speeches to avoid the question alto gether, but certainly had not heard the principle ad vocated. The Hon. Member for Somersetshire him self, without the aid of the Anti-Corn-law League, would have upset any corn-law that might have been made. His Hon. Friend the Member for Somersetshire had said, that he never rose to speak of the corn-laws without the horror of abundance before his eyes. Whatever was before him horrible in form and aspect was sure to have a cornucopia in his hand. But while his Hon. Friend had such a horror of plenty, he could tell him that the people in his own county, in his own immediate vicinity, were obliged to depend upon turnips for their daily subsistence, and on the products which the mildness of the season and the kindness of Providence had allowed to come forth. It would not do to talk to him of speeches that. had been spoken five years ago. He had never given a vote in that House, but in favour of relaxing protective duties.—( Hear, hear.) He had seen his Hon. Friend the Member for Somersetshire present 110 petitions against the corn-laws, and every one of those petitions stated that the corn-laws and the tariff were the destruction of agriculture. He told the farmers. that the very cern-law which last year threatened their entire ruin, was this year the only thing that would save them. Now, what must the farmers think ? They were persons of as much intelligence as any of the middling classes in this country, and could tell as well as most persons what faith to put in the representations of others. And the most honest way of acting would be at once to tell them that the existing corn-laws will shortly exist no longer. He would now come to the great question of all, which was— " What is to become of the land?" Now, the principal argu ment which he had heard repeated over and over again—and it was stated first in order by the Hon. Member for the Univer sity of Oxford, and not more strongly by any Hon. Member since, but it had been refuted a great number of times during the debate—that argument was this, that such a measure as this should not be carried, for if it should be, it would ruin the in stitutions of the country. He (Mr. Escott) owned that he was perfectly astonished on hearing that argument used by Hon. Members ; for what were the institutions of the country The Church ? The courts of law ? The Houses of Parlia ment? Did they mean to put the preservation of the institu tions of the country upon the maintenance of a restriction on the importation of food in the time of scarcity, or of appre hended scarcity? Because, if they did, he wouldjtell them plainly that never were the institutions in any free country ever defended by such an argument, and never could they be de fended by such an argument. What did Pitt say about appre hension of scarcity? Did he get up and talk about protection, and the danger of injuring the institutions of the country? No; he endeavoured to abolish every vestige of protection. He said that the first duty of a Minister of the Crown was to take care that the people should be fed.—( Cheers.) He (Mr. Escott) should like to know whether the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford would like to close the ports against the importation of food ?—( Cheers.) He (Mr. Escott) did not see the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury in his place, and he regretted that he was not, because he spoke very eloquently on that point. He said that the carrying of this measure would ruin the valuable institutions of the country, and he said that the party that had proposed this measure had ne right to do any such thing. He ( Mr. Escott) remembered that Hon. Member delivered a very able lecture in that House some time ago on the political history of the country, and he remembered him saying in very vigorous language to the Noble Lord( J. Russell) and the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, who constituted the great Whig party, " You Whigs have no right to claim free trade, whatever else may be your merits; it was Pitt that pro pagated the great doctrine ofi free trade." Pitt, the great Tory Minister, he said, had done that. And yet the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury had said to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, "You are a traitor to your party,.for espous ing principles of this kind, whatever be the necessities of the country, because your party should necessarily keep up a re strictive policy." He would not detain the House much longer upon this subject. He for his own part thought that the institutions of the country could not be injured by any thing so much as the restriotion of the supply of the people's food in times of scarcity. Honourable Gentlemen had said that the present scarcity, or the apprehension of that scarcity, had been greatly exaggerated. It was exaggerated, or it was not. Now, the Right Honourable Gentleman the Recorder of Dublin and the Member for the University of Dublin went so far as to say that in the greater number of the counties in Ireland, there was actually no necessity at all—that there was an average supply of potatoes at the present time. Now, on inquiry, he found persons coming from Ireland who stated to him—he would say it with every respect for the statements of the Right Hon. Gentleman—that there was no foundation whatever in the Right Honourable Gentleman's statements. The question then came to this—which was to be believed ? Was he to believe the Right Hon. Gentleman the Recoeder for Dublin, or was he to believe the papers that were on the table of the House, and which were the accounts of Roman Catholic clergymen and clergymen of the Esta blished Church, and of all other excellent persons who were sending to this country from dal to day accounts of the dread of the scarcity that was coming upon them in a very short space of time.—( Hear, hear.) Was it then false that they went to the potato-pits and found them one mass of rottenness? He certainly would confess, that with all the respect due to the statements of the Right Honourable Gentleman, he was prepared to believe the statements of such a numerous body rather than that of the Right Hon. Gentleman, who he believed was misinformed on the matter. But Hen. Members came to that House for the purpose of stating the results of their own experience. He would state what was going on in certain parts of England where he resided. The people there found that at least one-half of the potato crop had been destroyed, and the potato, he was sorry to say, was the greater portion of the subsistence of the people. The wheat crop was also very deficient in that district, and it was very much to be feared that the crops of the next summer would be deficient.—(Hear, hear.) He would then ask them whether in order to pre serve the institutions of the country it was necessary to keep up a restriction on the importation of food, when in Ireland perhaps more than one-fourth, and when in England at least one-fourth of the food of the people was destroyed ? His Hon. Friend the Member for the University of Oxford had used certain expressions 'in his speech which he (Mr. Escott) wished he had not heard. He said, "Do not disturb the peaceable and prosperous state of things." (Protectionist cheers.) Quieta non movere.—( Hear , hear.) He believed in his conscien c e th a t w ithi n three short months from this time, around his own dwelling, the quiet which the Hon. Member would not disturb would be a cry from the grave complaining of the deficiency of the food of the people, and he believed that in two-thirds of Ireland there would be a similar cry. What did thejl-lon. Member mean by saying Quieta non movere? Did he mean to say that in order to support the • institutions of the country it was necessary to restrict • the food of the people? If he (Mr. Escott) would look back into past times he would find that with the present corn-laws we have had distress even in the agricultural districts ; and if he would go further back he would find that even with the former corn-law, we have had the moat severe agricultural distress. And yet, this was the state of things that Hon. Gentlemen would protect. What he wanted to know was, whether in maintaining the corn-laws Hon. Gentlemen wished to keep the price of corn high or not ? If they did not mean to raise the price of corn, how was protection good for agri culturists. If they mean to raise the price of corn, then they wished to keep the food of the people dear and scarce. Last session he took the liberty of making a mo ti on , w hi c h h a d been alluded to by th e Ri g ht Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government three times since the commencement of the pre • sent debate, and that motion related to the introduction of maize duty free. At that time he did think the introduction of maize would be very beneficial to the agriculturists, as well as the country at large, for he thought that it would be a means of accelerating the repeal of the corn-laws, as, indeed, that object had, in this instance, been accelerated by the failure of the potato and wheat crops. He did not anticipate that failure ; but he believed that the introduction of maize, duty free, would enable farmers to feed their stock without having recourse to the food of the people. But he never for one moment imagined that the importation of maize alone would make up for the deficiency of a bad harvest ; all the object he had in view in making that motion was the ac celeration of the repeal of the corn-laws. If the farmers had maize they would he enabled to feed more catfle, and we should consequently have more butcher's meat At the time that he gave notice of his motion, he made inquiries from several farmers and cattle dealers, who traversed a district of country twenty miles long and fifteen wide, comprising all kinds of land and all species of rural occu- . pation. He asked one of the farmers of that district, whether he did not think that in the course of last winter he would have saved a great deal of money had he been able to purchase maize duty free; and his reply was, that he certainly would, and that one out of every twenty of his cattle died from sheer starvation. Now it so happened that in that very district an enterprising man lived, who had an immense quantity of maize, which he had imported from the United States, but which, in consequence of the high duty upon it no one could purchase it; so that the present system of protection, instead of bein g bene cial, was injurious t o th e farmers.—( dear. ) It was said that this measure would ruin the small farmers. Now he lived in a county abounding with small farmers, and he was on intimate terms with many of them, and he was informed by them that they would be much benefited if they could purchase maize and other such articles free of duty. One of those small farmers had told him that he had lost at least 10/. ix the shape of duty paid on maize. He (Mr. Escott) did not believe that the pass ing of this measure would cause so much ruin, or, on the other hand, so much happiness to this country, as appeared to be anticipated. Did Honourable Gentlemen who had spoken think that they could govern the country with the Duke of Richmond as their leader ? He believed that even the Duke of Buckingham would fill the office of Prime Mi nister better. The Duke of Richmond had an affection for two sayings—one was his prophecy about wool, which they all knew to be entirely fallacious ; and the other was his saying to the effect, that in Sussex they did not grow glass, but timber. He did not believe that the country could be governed by a Government of which that Noble Duke was a member. They wished to find some leader in whom they could repose, and who would stand between them and their opponents, and lead them to a successful victory. About five years ago they found such a man ; and now, when he refuses to lead them to battle against the interests of the people, they were determined to dismiss him from his command. Mr. CHRISTOPHER—No, no. Mr. B. ESCOTT—The Hon. Member for Lincolnshire dissents from that. He (Mr. Escott) however believed that it was not the interest of the leader of a great party to lead that party against the people. They (the protectionists) had had such a leader and they had now disoarded him. Now he supposed that they meant to do the battle of protection on their own acconnt,—(“ Hear, hear," and cheers from the Protectionists.) He hoped, in order to avoid deceiving the farmer, that they would at once tell him what they thought would be the probable issue of this struggle, and whether it would end in victory or delvat.—(Hear, heir.) If they ° thought—as he thought they must—that the iss ue eld 1,,e defeat, had they not better give up the contest at 0e . 7 0 , submit to the fate which they could not avoid-7(oes hear," and " No, no" )—when they consider that t i ll To p are already in great want—(" No, no," from Met, rh i te el the protectionists.) The Hon. Member for Somerset that the people are not in want.—(Hear, bear.) 11 .. e tate dt the Hon. Member had been in the House when hr i oiet condition of the people in the county of which he ( Le re tg° was Member. If the Hon. Member would read t o a tue which hal been laid on the table of the g e s set! would tell him whether the people were es "_j not. He said, " they were not in want." w et", first person he had heard who had th e g o Woe, to deny that tilers was any want ?—(Hear, bear.) wir e like to know whether he thought that—in the cas e or his (Mr. Mile s ' s ) coun ty, where the people are bepiteelo eil subscription, where pea s and p u lse are sent tie for herir.t4 alive—that was an i n di ca ti on o f p ros perity.— ( If el te eliev Mr. MILES did not k no w that such a state ext egi paMr. rish in his county. B. ESCOTT—The Hon. Member sa y s he j e - 00 ° know it. He (Mr. Escort ) was aware of that; Its freu o rb°, he did not—if he did, he would not have expresSea...) horror of the comi n mountain of corn.—(Heart 11,11:toisl!" would not have made g such a speech as he did a few fl o e had he been aware of those facts ; he was possessedee ri) too intelligent, and too generous a mind.—(Hea r, Mr. MILES - was not aware that he had ever entre f ore, feeling of horror upen the subject of the importation b e er 10 P i Mr. H. ESCOTT had never heard the Hon. 1",,6%, bel l '' a speech without it. It was his staple article.—(Defl; ee l ; He alway dreaded the overflow of foreign corn; t bep ways dolorous u p on th e su bj ect , an d h e had b Iff u oi the position which they now occupied, more than l ie Hon. Member connected with that House, or e ven ;a, 0 10 League, by gre as i ng th e w h ee l s o f the cart ; te e, t l e. (Mr. Miles) wo u ld no t a ll ow th e gr ease to be r b - e ten, he was assured by the G overnmen t th a t tar sho uld (P t ; with the grease, to prevent its being sold for buttere;o,o hear.) He (Mr. Escett) believed that no eewl en r e, l!e more anxious for the 'uc cess o f th e present Inel s , u oo o° thought it conducive to the interests of the people,' the Hon. Member for Somersetshire. the r oses Captain GLADSTONE should briefly state t he e which induced him to give his vote in-favour of . riet ecl io !' Member for Somersetshire's amendment. He ec ' e n il t i q uel'e painful duty to oppose the Government on the ere e se " e ie be l ,o but he trusted that, upon a future occasion , he s" e be es 4,t to afford him his wonted support. He would We p iot": 0 reedy to support Ministers on the present melloure'rioeirty those measu-e had been proposed upon the same : t iood:0 they had previously acted—namely, a gradual redu no tert r,l duty on raw materials. He considered that vibe" (10 1 0 to agriculture was remeved,all protection must ceo: e i , fse; The Anti-Corn-law League seemed aware of tn; tieo glt it was for this reason they attacked the corn cl u , e or e . e o l they knew that they would then have an easy vle', e ' e t.ool tP ether interests,—(" Hear, hear," from the fl o peigi f e It had beeen said, however, th a t th e y w ere onlY ece ssit)ei the tariff of 1842. If so, wh ere th en w as the n t fist ei the declaration on the part of th e G overn ment thaws/04e' ehenged their opinion.—( Protectionist cheers.) It eieesl"cee failure of the potato crop alone which gave rise to til M es esti ', iee The Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her ai last' v, theof verment had admitted that his experience of lief . , e i years hid tend , d to impress upon his mini th e T e l 0 0 00 etill greater reduction. He (Captain Gladetonut be 0 / held ultra views on the subject of protection , b,, e tecti l ill confess that he was an advocate of a moderate P" .oti ottf i ee , ( Hear, hear.) The different interests of this e , been protected. Under this protection the CO' t ri o f r t o rished ; and the most able writers on the sulil ee ro tee!V economy bad given it as their opinion that P geo i d:l! agri-ultiire should not be suddenly withdrawn - he Frio, think that the present measure accorded with t it s f o ro laid down by those writers. He did n ot think eerr reduction to protection. The cotton manufaet peer,. country had grown up to their present Penuratolfsol under a system of protection against the cotton ru s t thel ri e/ of India.—(H ea r, hear.) The Gallant Mo nb sond e } ferred to the speech of the Hon. Member for h i, tirr r i ( Mr. Hudso n .) He (Mr. Hudson) had state d in 0010 t y that the removal of protection to agricultu re b Sl ic e!" affect the large landed proprietors 8° tflue e tel' hi e t e? tenant farmers, and that this question was f o', a tenant-farmer question. The occupiers of enol,". oi telseg no doubt, under the influence of competition , tu v ri ele to exist. Such were the opinions of the Hon e ) ber for Sunderland. Now, he (Captain Glocl lt l l ll rye' that four-fifths of the farmers of England were ot n If, 0 0 and in Ireland there was a much larger proportion' 0014 the Noble Member should be ;correct in bi g be te ? of the effects of the abolishment of protection , vi et eri,l result would it produce upon this class?—(H ear ' cli't tt had made many inquiries upon the subject of t oreitell Ireland, and he should be glad if the present t nes elets 0 01 . , be , likely to afford them any relief. The Ho n ' ioio o Wolverhampton (Mr. Villiers) had made an eu"teroO r et effect that if the ports were immediately to be ..,rot Ire there was no corn t o come i n . Of o f quence, then, could it be to the poor eer,lPreol; to open the p or t s if th ere was nn eh° eft would not in the least alleviate t heir we , Jet Previous to 1842 trade was in a very depressed shireel then they have had not alone good, but abundsnt sorest the great revival of trade in the United States t ee,' opinion the prosperity of the country, and n e t eee ° ,,el which bad taken place in the commercial polio! i ttves —( Cheers.) There was another important eireurotel, which was not, he believed, noticed during th e io P a , et a that question; it was th e a b un d an t supp ly of cotton, P o e and the low price o f th a t ar ti c l e h ere . if it could be proved that the prosperous state 0, t oe" was owing to the commercial changes which h a d s od 4 7 that he (Mr. Gladstone) considered was n a e g e (N i t ? why they should sweep away altogether t" raw material—it was no proof, because litioo t ev l had taken place with good effect, that a total alth e a thl e e", have a similar tendency.—( Cheers.) He considerheerefie measure was to be proposed by any Minister of i o to,, er js e ' f i Government, it should not be by one who cerneeree tr ee d', protectionist principle s , an d if they were to hav e the measure be proposed by the party who t h e l e t Cheers from protectionists.) It was said •, d it to be a settlement of the question, but how cou' re petted that it would be a settlement when they w e c ider e ' it i:l e ' Parliament would be:shoi tly dissolved; and he cc dl ;l s ll 7 ,`", there was much more danger he setting one ''' e t 4'6 another than there would be if the measure 0 1 °f But he feared it wou ld h ave anot h er e ff e ct, Z o e, lasting nature ; it would s h a k e th e CoP sor e ' people would h ave i n public men.—( l.-° b e t ji r i from the protectionists.) H e might be wrong in tee but ho thought that if there was any mind amongN o o o tural classes, it would have that effect ; and if the. to the result of the elections in agricultural dist.riclei,ooolo appear that such a feeling was entertained. T i e rs tleman concluded by thanking the House for them' icegyeir fair manner in which they had listened to him, an • ri ; be,i" he their wish to go into Committee on the quest'; or e . dered it important that the public should know el o bjeo t •lt Y , Bible what was to be their fate on that important s .,ior o tc" Mr. COBDEN (who was loudly cheered on r i sat e and e t 03 assure the House that it is impossible for me u 00 egg enenstances to speak as I should wish, and of, jel quence detain the House for any great lenP re sePeet (Cheers.) I have not been able to attend to the P a o r it , fo rd bat I have had the m er it o f rea di ng e very o ° l. t e AO ter, though I have had occas i on t o com plain on Tell GO" occasions of the way in which H o nourab le eiSc o e spoke on every subject but the one und e h r io e t e "°,„{ eanch as I have had to complain, I do e t c ' . el er e r _ e i the present occasion every person went l a 10,, 0 1 extraneous matter than I had ever known before' r e ee ,h " e l e i to me, that the question was not the abrogsti° ° t er, w ef ie l es of the corn-laws, but the conduct of the Alin' ir euo" o o l : o Lord of the Treasury. Now, Sir, there MAY b e e , et) I will not say but there are just grounds, for t' for tr,.,6l Gentlemen opposite to complain of the Ministry t ,101 0 0, 0 they have pur sue d ; b u t, Si r , th e coun t r y will i n „ e i ete °l with them, f or , on f ormer occas i ons , th e y the tr r eeie s , l o ot did everything in their power to evade the q ue t eei j e brY,e this measure was introduced by the Whigs t e n eit ee' se e o el own as leader. introduced you opposed the measure then that is now au f- ech et w B But, into the mus t H s o a u y s , e w fi h rs e t n , sy t het ir c e o wr r e n i 01.) ; (el t i t ,fi Aids of vituperation as we are now, and e e be ee f el sympathise with you. If Hon. Gentleme n if "ref that their present leader contemplates, nu t ( in ° tles", the corn-laws, but going much further (a nd t o 7 ; 1 ) ought), I beg to assure them that they are e rr effectual means of arming the Minister with PO, O O io for the more you attack him, the more th e evel ,l oo, s e sympathise with him out of doors.—(Cheers.) ee oll°oo l ,l making the p resen t P r i me Mi n i s t er the most P:leell eo ltt,, e , the country, and should he go down into awl ee d t ee :10 turing district s th e Ri g ht H on . B aron ets r u oo et, esreit one continued triumph. The Right Hon• B ar " s ore , tof cretary for Ho me Aff a i rs , i n a d voca ti ng this Wi el i eeeno o ,l won much for him se lf on thi s occas i on ; the Ins 0 ,0el! t • l i o hi d bution which h e h as given in his able stateme nt ' oe orfPotO in the marty r d om i n which you are inflic tin g the 0 0 0 0 1 made him so popular, that in any of the towns ld rece'oe oft England, say Manchester or Liverpool, be wol" ...e „(Cli er e respect and honour than the 0 grea t es t merchan t ' 41°0 ° 4 laughter.) Ido no t thi n k th e Hon. Gentl e ln e° s e!' t °l ,o Posed to this measure are pursuing:a wil e 1 1 ; seey st el li it That is the first great fact that I will allege; t iegr h alo to which I will call your attention is one o f ne ori de t t e r de ie If I understand your position rightly, you e u e n :free J e gl t tic e House is the proper place where the question a' t he jul 0 to be decided, without knowing what is . 0 tbs o ftt ,f ,,, of the country. I tell you, if you believe to go°,:jt of such principles, you are unworthy , of the aiw t ips o e' i n to t er on any such grounds. Why, when I caMe, bete, , t ott in 1841, I met you with a majority of 91. but :iesg ,l el the corn-law should be only changed ? f lo t ' e ,d o gg would never cease my exertions until I a broge t tit s s te l3- ' ,Or I the you should also, if you are honest and con' t e t ee r to, t e same language, if you believe they areessential of the country. You should say, if we are ~yt c roft ground, we will be ready to spring up aga in : that oe.,id your course, if you are conscientiously of opin e ing n ot rot is good which you are advocating. A" ti !, a r i o t t o er e you can carry out your purpose—and this t ee , o rte ,o o 00 I wish to draw your attention—for it is most 1 1 lie erC es e 1 public in other places—whatdo eouexpect tog % 0 there are no middle classes, where there are 1 01 00 1 i —no manufacturers—no farmers, probably * n ot the 'tel t , be read. You want a dissolution — yo u 0 0 d o of the country Have you ever ee n e - ~ , i 0 the opinion of the country is? l ' 1 ", Ye' o ritf es te know what the country thinks of your opinionrsi•cal 0,41000 will be able to get, by a dissolution, a "'l er for s ee f ' this House, but I tell that if you consider lye t t e ot ioe you will not have that majority if you a" the r e g i' t h° , liament. I think lam some authority on, tell l e w e ill this country.—( Cheers.) Well, then, you e '` o lv pot ilk change has taken place, and wouldthat gain by such a dissolution. I o_,rary, elt 10 3 s• three months ago, but, on the eon is e rt t s br° W eis Oc t have agreed with you; but now your re e ) e r ie ot os Ol (Cries of " No, no.") It shows that you n e :, by th ee lte e these subjects as you ought. Do not be led n aw v 2 l ir e ,co(ch sit shouting around you, lik• the manner i e ourg e ' -- for ge r whistle in a churchyard to keep up their y o u r ee rf_ e and laughter.) Examine these facts beta °u y 0 " leaders have done so, and you have none anle- .;! r them , o btc l ing to be your leaders unless they well co n -taints " •'ti cannot rank a town numbering 25,00 0 inh t 3D e ▪ l i • on iftl vo l ; you could depend for the return of a pro e __ o 0 ,, , hear, and cries of " No, no.") Well, then , end pocket boroughs and your nomination eon.ntireousgsbe, o di l 0 sums that you have a majority of pocket n° TA " oh' r , allow that that majority may possibly en, l ° U y ou won e ote, o thirty, what would be your position then . , Lae et , , on this side of the House the Members for Len_olou verl Yorkshire, Cheshire, and every member . or . si'L fio l! Scotland.—(t heers.) Why, you would shring,snbeour position, and there would be more defections 1,4 e, 1;1 01;0 arid more adhesions to our ranks than ever. t ie ,e to - - .1 0 0, fo r forePedthere - got ° 'be In spite of all pledges, nay, if yon were ste hero t ( 1 1 ,, t e, pledges, you would come across this floor, no safety without it, and the very men who cameleuria protection, would vote otherwise when they ret i e re v e , country was determined to have the corne n le_ e? e e J e ( Hear, hear.) Now, is not that public opt l e ': eri ytP t . T t licl have a sufficient amount of public o pinion to_,!', be ri oW o l p i o iD o i this country. The dynasty of the Stuarts wolto'vuelierepteion upon the throne, had they the same amoun o t ' ie for - expressed in their favour as was now declar the corn-laws.—( Hear, hear.) That amount n!,F.nd is sufficient to clang, the form of GOTeralle " ~.--~''. i t, A h h ..._, th e to t Ye i i c Lrid Irk'